Back

PURE-MRI: An International Study Assessing Physician Accuracy in Delineating the Prostate and Urethra on Prostate MRI

Nguyen, L.; Song, Y.; Dornisch, A.; Baxter, M. T.; Barrett, T.; Dale, A. M.; Harisinghani, M.; Kamran, S. C.; Liss, M. A.; Dess, R. T.; Margolis, D. J.; Weinberg, E. P.; Seibert, T. M.

2025-04-25 radiology and imaging
10.1101/2025.04.23.25326296 medRxiv
Show abstract

PurposePrecise delineation of genitourinary structures during prostate cancer (PCa) care is critical to optimize treatment delivery while minimizing toxicity and injury. The Prostate and UREthra on MRI (PURE-MRI) study was an international, prospective study to assess physicians accuracy segmenting prostate and urethra on MRI. MethodsPhysicians who diagnose or treat PCa were invited to contour prostate and urethra on patient cases using standard T2-weighted MRI (all planes). We compared these contours to reference consensus segmentations produced by a multidisciplinary panel of experts. We also evaluated performance of a validated prostate auto- segmentation AI tool. Accuracy was assessed with spatial and volumetric analyses. Mixed effects model was used to evaluate potential factors influencing contour performance. Results62 specialists from 11 countries created 114 prostate and 110 urethra contours. Prostate median (min, max) Dice score was 0.92 (0.62, 0.95) for physicians. There was no clear effect of clinical experience or focus. Maximum deviation inside (under-segmentation), maximum deviation beyond expert contour, and mean deviation (per case) from the reference prostate were 3.4 mm (1.0, 12.4), 5.3 mm (2.4, 17.3), and 1.6 mm (0.9, 3.9), respectively. In comparison, prostate auto-segmentation tool results were 0.95 (0.94, 0.96), 3.0 mm, 3.9 mm (3.1, 4.9), and 1.2 mm (1.1, 1.6), respectively. Physician performance was considerably worse for urethra, with Dice score of 0.33 (0.03, 0.69). No urethra AI tool was tested. ConclusionPhysicians contour the prostate on MRI with overall Dice score >0.9, though contours typically had errors >5 mm and sometimes >10 mm. These patterns were observed regardless of clinical experience, specialty, or clinical focus. AI tool performs well enough for clinical use, given comparable accuracy to practicing physicians. In contrast, urethra segmentation on MRI is challenging. More training, better imaging, and/or AI tools may be necessary to achieve consistent, accurate results for the urethra.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
38.8%
2
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 4%
10.7%
3
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 26%
6.6%
50% of probability mass above
4
Medical Physics
14 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.7%
5
European Radiology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.7%
6
International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics
21 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.2%
7
Brain Structure and Function
83 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.8%
8
Diagnostics
48 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.7%
9
Frontiers in Oncology
95 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
10
Journal of Medical Imaging
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.7%
11
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 51%
1.7%
12
Cancers
200 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.5%
13
Neuro-Oncology Advances
24 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.4%
14
Archives of Clinical and Biomedical Research
28 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.4%
15
The Prostate
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.0%
16
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
53 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
17
Biology Methods and Protocols
53 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
18
Human Brain Mapping
295 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
19
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.7%
20
Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology
10 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.7%
21
Analytical Biochemistry
26 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.7%
22
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
19 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.5%