AI-aided diagnostic performance for prostate MRI: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Authors
Affiliations (5)
Affiliations (5)
- Department of Radiology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, PR China.
- Shanghai Normal Medical Technology Co, Ltd, Putuo, Shanghai, PR China.
- Department of Radiology, Tongji Hospital Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, PR China.
- Department of Radiology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, PR China. [email protected].
- The Affiliated Suqian First People's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Suqian, Jiangsu, China. [email protected].
Abstract
AI is increasingly integrated within prostate cancer diagnosis pathway. To provide estimates of diagnostic accuracy of AI assistance for clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) via MRI. A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Scopus and Web of Science from January 2017 to October 2024 was performed for studies on the diagnostic utility of AI for prostate MRI. Diagnostic performance metrics were synthesized through hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic modeling with random-effects assumptions. Specially, to test inferiority and potential superiority of AI, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), cancer detection rate (CDR), and accuracy was pairwisely compared between AI and radiologists in study level using odds ratios (ORs) with Z-statistics. 7398 patients from 29 studies with AI-vs-human pairwise comparison were included. When acting as an assistant to human readers, AI demonstrated superior performance compared to stand-alone human readers in diagnosing csPCa via MRI, specifically with higher sensitivity (86.5% vs 82.6%, P = 0.001), specificity (57.8% vs 50.0%, P = 0.028), PPV (64.3% vs 58.9%, P = 0.001), and NPV (82.9% vs 76.5%, P = 0.001) while maintaining comparable CDR (40.5% vs 38.6%, P = 0.093). When used as standalone readers, AI exhibited higher specificity (58.7% vs 48.7%, P = 0.026) but at the cost of reduced sensitivity (87.2% vs 90.1%, P = 0.017). Subgroup analysis indicated that readers of varying experience levels could all improve their diagnostic performance with AI assistance. Integrating AI as an assistant in csPCa diagnostic workflows could enhance accuracy, particularly for less experienced readers. Trial Name: The efficiency comparison of radiologists with or without assistance of artificial intelligence in prostate cancer diagnosis: a meta-analysis. Registration date: April 17, 2024. CRD42024533016. Registration information available at: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ .