Non-Invasive Estimation of Gleason Score by Semantic Segmentation and Regression Tasks Using a Three-Dimensional Convolutional Neural Network

• Published in: Applied sciences Vol. 13; no. 14; p. 8028
• Main Authors: Yoshimura, Takaaki, Manabe, Keisuke, Sugimori, Hiroyuki
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Basel MDPI AG 01.07.2023
• Subjects: Accuracy; Automation; Biopsy; Cancer; Cancer therapies; Classification; Deep learning; gleason score; Health aspects; Investigations; Lymphatic system; Magnetic resonance imaging; Medical imaging equipment; Medical screening; Neural networks; Oncology, Experimental; Physical instruments; Prostate cancer; semantic segmentation; Semantics; Software; three-dimensional convolutional neural network (3D-CNN); Tomography; Workloads
• ISSN: 2076-3417; 2076-3417
• DOI: 10.3390/app13148028

The Gleason score (GS) is essential in categorizing prostate cancer risk using biopsy. The aim of this study was to propose a two-class GS classification (< and ≥GS 7) methodology using a three-dimensional convolutional neural network with semantic segmentation to predict GS non-invasively using multiparametric magnetic resonance images (MRIs). Four training datasets of T2-weighted images and apparent diffusion coefficient maps with and without semantic segmentation were used as test images. All images and lesion information were selected from a training cohort of the Society of Photographic Instrumentation Engineers, the American Association of Physicists in Medicine, and the National Cancer Institute (SPIE–AAPM–NCI) PROSTATEx Challenge dataset. Precision, recall, overall accuracy and area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC) were calculated from this dataset, which comprises publicly available prostate MRIs. Our data revealed that the GS ≥ 7 precision (0.73 ± 0.13) and GS < 7 recall (0.82 ± 0.06) were significantly higher using semantic segmentation (p < 0.05). Moreover, the AUROC in segmentation volume was higher than that in normal volume (ADCmap: 0.70 ± 0.05 and 0.69 ± 0.08, and T2WI: 0.71 ± 0.07 and 0.63 ± 0.08, respectively). However, there were no significant differences in overall accuracy between the segmentation and normal volume. This study generated a diagnostic method for non-invasive GS estimation from MRIs.