Background:Accurate upfront risk stratification in suspected clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) may reduce unnecessary prostate biopsies. Integrating clinical and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) variables using deep learning could improve prediction.Methods:We retrospectively analysed 538 men who underwent MRI and biopsy between April 2019-September 2024. A fully connected neural network was trained using 5-fold cross-validation. Model 1 included clinical features (age, prostate-specific antigen [PSA], PSA density, digital rectal examination, family history, prior negative biopsy, and ongoing therapy). Model 2 used MRI-derived Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) categories. Model 3 used all previous variables as well as lesion size, location, and prostate volume as determined on MRI.Results:Model 3 achieved the highest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC = 0.822), followed by Model 2 (AUC = 0.778) and Model 1 (AUC = 0.716). Sensitivities for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) were 87.4%, 91.6%, and 86.8% for Models 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Although Model 3 had slightly lower sensitivity than Model 2, it showed higher specificity, reducing false positives and avoiding 43.4% and 21.2% more biopsies compared to Models 1 and 2. Decision curve analysis showed M2 had the highest net benefit at risk thresholds ≤ 20%, while M3 was superior above 20%.Conclusions:Model 3 improved csPCa risk stratification, particularly in biopsy-averse settings, while Model 2 was more effective in cancer-averse scenarios. These models support personalized, context-sensitive biopsy decisions.
背景:对疑似临床显著性前列腺癌(csPCa)进行准确的前期风险分层可减少不必要的前列腺活检。利用深度学习整合临床与磁共振成像(MRI)变量有望提升预测效能。 方法:我们回顾性分析了2019年4月至2024年9月期间接受MRI和活检的538例男性患者。采用五折交叉验证训练全连接神经网络。模型1纳入临床特征(年龄、前列腺特异性抗原[PSA]、PSA密度、直肠指检、家族史、既往阴性活检史及当前治疗情况);模型2采用MRI衍生的前列腺影像报告与数据系统(PI-RADS)分类;模型3综合前述所有变量及MRI测定的病灶大小、位置与前列腺体积。 结果:模型3获得最高的受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUC=0.822),其次为模型2(AUC=0.778)和模型1(AUC=0.716)。模型1、2、3检测csPCa的灵敏度分别为87.4%、91.6%和86.8%。尽管模型3灵敏度略低于模型2,但其特异度更高,与模型1和2相比分别减少43.4%和21.2%的活检,有效降低假阳性率。决策曲线分析显示,在风险阈值≤20%时模型2净获益最高,而阈值>20%时模型3更具优势。 结论:模型3优化了csPCa风险分层,尤其适用于规避活检的临床场景;模型2则在规避癌症风险的情境中更为有效。这些模型为个体化、情境敏感性的活检决策提供了支持。