JOURNAL ARTICLE
RESEARCH SUPPORT, N.I.H., EXTRAMURAL
RESEARCH SUPPORT, U.S. GOV'T, NON-P.H.S.
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Convolutional Neural Network Quantification of Gleason Pattern 4 and Association With Biochemical Recurrence in Intermediate-Grade Prostate Tumors.

Differential classification of prostate cancer grade group (GG) 2 and 3 tumors remains challenging, likely because of the subjective quantification of the percentage of Gleason pattern 4 (%GP4). Artificial intelligence assessment of %GP4 may improve its accuracy and reproducibility and provide information for prognosis prediction. To investigate this potential, a convolutional neural network (CNN) model was trained to objectively identify and quantify Gleason pattern (GP) 3 and 4 areas, estimate %GP4, and assess whether CNN-predicted %GP4 is associated with biochemical recurrence (BCR) risk in intermediate-risk GG 2 and 3 tumors. The study was conducted in a radical prostatectomy cohort (1999-2012) of African American men from the Henry Ford Health System (Detroit, Michigan). A CNN model that could discriminate 4 tissue types (stroma, benign glands, GP3 glands, and GP4 glands) was developed using histopathologic images containing GG 1 (n = 45) and 4 (n = 20) tumor foci. The CNN model was applied to GG 2 (n = 153) and 3 (n = 62) tumors for %GP4 estimation, and Cox proportional hazard modeling was used to assess the association of %GP4 and BCR, accounting for other clinicopathologic features including GG. The CNN model achieved an overall accuracy of 86% in distinguishing the 4 tissue types. Furthermore, CNN-predicted %GP4 was significantly higher in GG 3 than in GG 2 tumors (P = 7.2 × 10-11 ). %GP4 was associated with an increased risk of BCR (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.09 per 10% increase in %GP4; P = .010) in GG 2 and 3 tumors. Within GG 2 tumors specifically, %GP4 was more strongly associated with BCR (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.12; P = .006). Our findings demonstrate the feasibility of CNN-predicted %GP4 estimation, which is associated with BCR risk. This objective approach could be added to the standard pathologic assessment for patients with GG 2 and 3 tumors and act as a surrogate for specialist genitourinary pathologist evaluation when such consultation is not available.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app