Combining and analyzing novel multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging metrics for predicting Gleason score

Rulon Mayer; Baris Turkbey; Peter Choyke; Charles B Simone 2nd

doi:10.21037/qims-21-1092

Combining and analyzing novel multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging metrics for predicting Gleason score

Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2022 Jul;12(7):3844-3859. doi: 10.21037/qims-21-1092.

Authors

Rulon Mayer^{1

2}, Baris Turkbey³, Peter Choyke³, Charles B Simone 2nd⁴

Affiliations

¹ University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
² OncoScore, Garrett Park, MD, USA.
³ National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
⁴ New York Proton Center, New York, NY, USA.

Abstract

Background: Radiologists currently subjectively examine multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (MP-MRI) to determine prostate tumor aggressiveness using the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System scoring system (PI-RADS). Recent studies showed that modified signal to clutter ratio (SCR), tumor volume, and eccentricity (elongation or roundness) of prostate tumors correlated with Gleason score (GS). No previous studies have combined the prostate tumor's shape, SCR, tumor volume, in order to predict potential tumor aggressiveness and GS.

Methods: MP-MRI (T1, T2, diffusion, dynamic contrast-enhanced images) were obtained, resized, translated, and stitched to form spatially registered multi-parametric cubes. Multi-parametric signatures that characterize prostate tumors were inserted into a target detection algorithm [adaptive cosine estimator (ACE)]. Pixel-based blobbing, and labeling were applied to the threshold ACE images. Eccentricity calculation used moments of inertia from the blobs. Tumor volume was computed by counting pixels within multi parametric MRI blobs and tumor outlines based on pathologist assessment of whole mount histology. Pathology assessment of GS was performed on whole mount prostatectomy. The covariance matrix and mean of normal tissue background was computed from normal prostate. Using signatures and normal tissue statistics, the z-score, noise corrected SCR [principal component (PC), modified regularization] from each patient was computed. Eccentricity, tumor volume, and SCR were fitted to GS. Analysis of variance assesses the relationship among the variables.

Results: A multivariate analysis generated correlation coefficient (0.60 to 0.784) and P value (0.00741 to <0.0001) from fitting two sets of independent variates, namely, tumor eccentricity (the eccentricity for the largest blob, weighted average for the eccentricity) and SCR (removing 3 PCs, removing 4 PCs, modified regularization, and z-score) to GS. The eccentricity t-statistic exceeded the SCR t-statistic. The three-variable fit to GS using tumor volume (histology, MRI) yielded correlation coefficients ranging from 0.724 to 0.819 (P value <<0.05). Tumor volumes generated from histology yielded higher correlation coefficients than MRI volumes. Adding volume to eccentricity and SCR adds little improvement for fitting GS due to higher correlation coefficients among independent variables and little additional, independent information.

Conclusions: Combining prostate tumors eccentricity with SCR relatively highly correlates with GS.

Keywords: Gleason score (GS); Tumor morphology; histology of whole mount prostatectomy; multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (MP-MRI); prostate cancer; regularization; signal to clutter ratio (SCR).