Prostate cancer management is
surrounded by controversy.
From the screening debate
through choosing the best treatment
option for localized disease, there is
little consensus on the approach to the
most common solid tumor in men. A
variety of predictive models are being
developed to assist in clinical decisionmaking.[
1,2] Although transrectal ultrasound
(TRUS)-directed prostate
biopsies represent the "gold standard"
in the diagnosis of the disease, limitations
of this approach have been recognized.[
3] To compensate for these
limitations, the absolute number of needle
cores taken has increased from 6 to
10-12 or more. TRUS enhancements
such as color Doppler and the use of
contrast agents hold promise, but they
have not yet replaced the TRUS grayscale
approach.[4]
Drs. Porter and Crawford have reviewed
one strategy that may improve
the diagnostic accuracy of prostate
cancer biopsy and potentially avoid
unnecessary biopsies-artificial neural
networks (ANNs) combined with
TRUS biopsy as a predictive model.
Artifical Neural Networks
The ANN is a specific type of computer-
driven, artificial intelligence
software system, based on the neural
structure and function of the brain.
Basic processing units called nodes
simulate neurons, and weighted interconnections
between the nodes simulate
the basic units of the nervous
system, dendrites, and axons.[5] These
interconnections weigh functions as
multipliers that simulate the connection
strengths in the analogous
biologic model. ANNs are not programmed,
but are unique in that most
"learn" by experience, ie, a "supervised
learning" phase known as training.
The ANN learning set consists of
actual clinical case inputs and known
outputs (ie, results). These clinical
variables (in this case, data such as
digital rectal exam findings, prostatespecific
antigen [PSA] levels, and age)
and a known pathologic outcome are
presented to the ANN sequentially and
repeatedly. A training algorithm automatically
adjusts the connection
weights, consequently changing the
output values, to reduce the errors
between the actual ANN outputs and
the expected outputs. With training, a
set of connections is developed to allow
for the greatest number of correct
predictions for a given training dataset.
Measuring ANN Performance
Next, the system is validated with
new cases to determine the accuracy
of the prediction. The performance of
an ANN can be measured by calculating
the sensitivity, specificity, and
both negative- and positive-predictive
value of a specific ANN output. The
overall performance may be quantified
by generating a receiver-operator
characteristic (ROC) curve.
TRUS Images Validate Output
ANNs have great potential in the
overall management of prostate cancer.[
6,7] Though not directly addressed
in this review, another use for ANN
technology is to enhance TRUS images
and identify malignant foci. In fact,
one of the earliest reports of the use of
ANNs in prostate cancer, published in
1992, involved the analysis of TRUS
images of the prostate.[8] In this preliminary
work, the ANN was able to
differentiate between prostatic and nonprostatic
tissues in TRUS images. Pure
ultrasound radiofrequency images inputted
into the ANN model for the
analysis of ultrasound images of the
breast, colon, prostate, and other tissues
have shown strong results in the
identification of malignancy.[9-11]
By gathering actual TRUS images
prior to radical prostatectomy and
comparing these to whole-mount pathology
slides, prospective libraries
of prostate tissue image types have
been developed and incorporated into
ANNs. With such a technique, an
ANN was used to identify areas suspicious
for cancer in a validation set
of TRUS images.[10] Preliminary data
demonstrated that 99% of confirmed
benign samples and 79% of malignant
lesions were correctly classified.
Of isoechoic cancers, 97% were correctly
classified by the ANN.
This technology is also applicable
to other modalities such as magnetic
resonance and color Doppler imaging.[
4,12] Automated image analysis,
including pattern recognition and ANNs
applied in real time to TRUS images,
may successfully identify lesions that
cannot be seen by the human eye.
Such automated image analysis and
pattern recognition, however, is currently
unavailable for TRUS systems.
Predictive Modeling Tools
As noted, predictive modeling tools
are being developed to assist the clinician
in the decision-making process.
Traditionally, these tools have relied
on solely clinical parameters (eg, PSA,
clinical stage). ANN technology allows
the integration of many more
complex variables into this decision
process. Although specific identification
of malignancies on imaging
studies was the first use of ANN
technology, Drs. Porter and Crawford
review the combination of ANNs with
basic clinical parameters and ultimate
diagnostic TRUS imaging and biopsy
to develop predictive models for prostate
cancer needle biopsy. This could
be the next major advance in our ability
to avoid unnecessary prostate biopsies.
The integration of clinical
parameters or other markers to improve
the identification of prostate cancer is a
basic hurdle that must be overcome.
While these developments reviewed
by Porter and Crawford are
outstanding, they are not the final solution
to the prostate cancer screening
and diagnosis controversy. Many
men have clinically insignificant prostate
cancer at the time of diagnosis. A
theoretical concern is that this elegant
ANN technology may inadvertently
lead to overdiagnosis of so-called autopsy
cancers. Indeed, the diagnosis
of the "clinically insignificant," often
small-volume prostate cancers is one
of the major arguments against screening
for prostate cancer. These insignificant
prostate cancers may never
cause clinical symptoms nor result in
death ("more men live with than die
from prostate cancer") and might be
amenable to watchful waiting approaches.[
13] Whether the enhanced
methods proposed by the authors
cause more insignificant tumors to be
detected remains to be seen.
In addition, we need a technology
that can differentiate the life-threatening
tumors from the indolent ones
even before the prostate is violated by
a needle through the rectum. Could
ANNs be incorporated into an imaging
modality that would allow the
identification of tumors and their classification
as insignificant or significant?
Although preliminary work has
been done in identifying the aggressiveness
of prostate cancer on imaging
studies, this remains a challenge
for the future.[14]
Predictive models are becoming
commonplace in the management of
prostate cancer. The benefit of the
ANN described by the authors is that
more complex variables can be analyzed
to help with decision-making in
this complex disease.
