Evaluation of A Computer-Aided Detection Software for Prostate Cancer Prediction: Excellent Diagnostic Accuracy Independent of Preanalytical Factors

Abstract

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common noncutaneous cancer in men in the Western world. In addition to accurate diagnosis, Gleason grading and tumor volume estimates are critical for patient management. Computer-aided detection (CADe) software can be used to facilitate the diagnosis and improve the diagnostic accuracy and reporting consistency. However, preanalytical factors such as fixation and staining of prostate biopsy specimens and whole slide images (WSI) on scanners can vary significantly between pathology laboratories and may, therefore, impact the quality of WSI and utility of CADe algorithms. We evaluated the performance of a CADe software in predicting PCa on WSIs of prostate biopsy specimens and focused on whether there were any significant differences in image quality between WSIs obtained on different scanners and specimens from different histopathology laboratories. Thirty prostate biopsy specimens from 2 histopathology laboratories in the United States were included in this study. The hematoxylin and eosin slides of the biopsy specimens were scanned on 3 scanners, generating 90 WSIs. These WSIs were then analyzed using a CADe software (INIFY Prostate, Algorithm), which identified and annotated all areas suspicious for PCa and calculated the tumor volume (percentage area of the biopsy core involved). Study pathologists then reviewed the Algorithm’s annotations and tumor volume calculation to confirm the diagnosis and identify benign glands that were misclassified as cancer (false positive) and cancer glands that were misclassified as benign (false negative). The CADe software worked equally well on WSIs from all 3 scanners and from both laboratories, with similar sensitivity and specificity. The overall sensitivity was 99.4%, and specificity was 97%. The percentage of suspicious cancer areas calculated by the Algorithm was similar for all 3 scanners. For WSIs with small foci of cancer (<1 mm), the Algorithm identified all cancer glands (sensitivity, 100%). Preanalytical factors had no significant impact on whole slide imaging and subsequent application of a CADe software. Prediction accuracy could potentially be further improved by processing biopsy specimens in a centralized histology laboratory and training the Algorithm on WSIs from the same laboratory in order to minimize variations in preanalytical factors and optimize the diagnostic performance of the Algorithm.