CClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT06360523Updated May 6, 2025

To Evaluate an MRI-based Optimized Prostate Cancer Diagnostic Pathway Powered by Artificial Intelligence

An interventional study of AI modal and Standard review in Prostate Cancer, sponsored by Chinese University of Hong Kong. Recruiting at 1 site in Hong Kong. Open to male participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-05-06.

Sponsored by Chinese University of Hong Kong · Not applicable, Interventional, and Diagnostic

From the registry’s dates

  • Started Jun 2024; still recruiting 2 years 3 months later.
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
368
Allocation
Non-randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
Male
01

Study summary

It is a prospective paired-cohort study for diagnostic test evaluation. The study aim to determine the accuracy of AI review and investigate whether AI review could detect MRI visible significant cancer as effective as radiologist review. MRI image of about 368 men recommended for biopsy will be reviewed by an AI model and an experienced radiologist, respectively. AI review (index) and radiologist review (standard) will be blinded to each other, while biopsy urologists will be well-informed of the findings of both AI review and radiologist review and make personalized biopsy plan by combining both findings. The pathological results of MRI-ultrasound fusion biopsy (reference) will serve as the gold standard to assess the diagnostic accuracy.

Read the detailed description

ProstateAI is a prospective paired-cohort study for diagnostic test evaluation. ProstateAI will determine the accuracy of AI review and investigate whether AI review could detect MRI visible significant cancer as effective as radiologist review. MRI image of about 368 men recommended for biopsy will be reviewed by an AI model and an experienced radiologist, respectively. AI review (index) and radiologist review (standard) will be blinded to each other, while biopsy urologists will be well-informed of the findings of both AI review and radiologist review and make personalized biopsy plan by combining both findings. The pathological results of MRI-ultrasound fusion biopsy (reference) will serve as the gold standard to assess the diagnostic accuracy.

02

Conditions studied

  • Prostate Cancer

Browse trials for

03

In context

Prostatic Neoplasms

6,370 studies on the registry are indexed under Prostatic Neoplasms; 1,400 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 368 is above the median of 58 across 4,822 interventional studies indexed under Prostatic Neoplasms.

Browse Prostatic Neoplasms studies →

Lead sponsor

Chinese University of Hong Kong is the lead sponsor of 1,419 studies on the registry; 487 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
Male
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Patients recommended for prostate biopsy for diagnosis or re-assessment.
  • Men at least 18 years or over
  • Patients with prostate MRI image eligible for radiologist review and AI review.
  • Patient Informed Consent is signed.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patient contraindicated to prostate biopsy
  • Patient failed to complete the biopsy procedure
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Diagnostic
Allocation
Non-randomized
Intervention model
Crossover assignment
Masking
Single (Care provider)
Enrollment
368 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    AI review (index)

    self-paired design, AI review (index)

    Diagnostic Test: AI modal

  • Active comparator
    Radiologist review (Standard)

    self-paired design, radiologist review (standard)

    Diagnostic Test: Standard review

Interventions

  • Diagnostic testAI modal

    The MRI image will be reviewed by radiologist and AI model(s) respectively. The urologist will combine the results of the two approaches to optimize the biopsy strategy which is expected to result in more accurate diagnosis.

  • Diagnostic testStandard review

    The MRI image will be reviewed by radiologist.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Prostate Cancer detection rate of ISUP grade group ≥2

    Assessed by AI review, Radiologist review, and Biopsy (Targeted).

    Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 1 year

Secondary outcomes

  1. Diagnosis of any grade of prostate cancer

    Assessed by prostate biopsy

    Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 1 year

07

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
  • Prince of Wales Hospital, Chinese University of Hong Kong
    Hong Kong, Hong Kong
    Recruiting
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Halabi S, Lin CY, Kelly WK, Fizazi KS, Moul JW, Kaplan EB, Morris MJ, Small EJ. Updated prognostic model for predicting overall survival in first-line chemotherapy for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2014 Mar 1;32(7):671-7. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.52.3696. Epub 2014 Jan 21. PubMed 24449231 ↗
  • Ilic D, Djulbegovic M, Jung JH, Hwang EC, Zhou Q, Cleves A, Agoritsas T, Dahm P. Prostate cancer screening with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2018 Sep 5;362:k3519. doi: 10.1136/bmj.k3519. PubMed 30185521 ↗
  • Ahmed HU, El-Shater Bosaily A, Brown LC, Gabe R, Kaplan R, Parmar MK, Collaco-Moraes Y, Ward K, Hindley RG, Freeman A, Kirkham AP, Oldroyd R, Parker C, Emberton M; PROMIS study group. Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study. Lancet. 2017 Feb 25;389(10071):815-822. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32401-1. Epub 2017 Jan 20. PubMed 28110982 ↗
  • Mottet N, van den Bergh RCN, Briers E, Van den Broeck T, Cumberbatch MG, De Santis M, Fanti S, Fossati N, Gandaglia G, Gillessen S, Grivas N, Grummet J, Henry AM, van der Kwast TH, Lam TB, Lardas M, Liew M, Mason MD, Moris L, Oprea-Lager DE, van der Poel HG, Rouviere O, Schoots IG, Tilki D, Wiegel T, Willemse PM, Cornford P. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer-2020 Update. Part 1: Screening, Diagnosis, and Local Treatment with Curative Intent. Eur Urol. 2021 Feb;79(2):243-262. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.09.042. Epub 2020 Nov 7. PubMed 33172724 ↗
  • Wei JT, Barocas D, Carlsson S, Coakley F, Eggener S, Etzioni R, Fine SW, Han M, Kim SK, Kirkby E, Konety BR, Miner M, Moses K, Nissenberg MG, Pinto PA, Salami SS, Souter L, Thompson IM, Lin DW. Early Detection of Prostate Cancer: AUA/SUO Guideline Part II: Considerations for a Prostate Biopsy. J Urol. 2023 Jul;210(1):54-63. doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000003492. Epub 2023 Apr 25. PubMed 37096575 ↗
  • Bass EJ, Pantovic A, Connor MJ, Loeb S, Rastinehad AR, Winkler M, Gabe R, Ahmed HU. Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy techniques compared to transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy of the prostate: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2022 Feb;25(2):174-179. doi: 10.1038/s41391-021-00449-7. Epub 2021 Sep 21. PubMed 34548624 ↗
  • Siddiqui MM, Rais-Bahrami S, Truong H, Stamatakis L, Vourganti S, Nix J, Hoang AN, Walton-Diaz A, Shuch B, Weintraub M, Kruecker J, Amalou H, Turkbey B, Merino MJ, Choyke PL, Wood BJ, Pinto PA. Magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound-fusion biopsy significantly upgrades prostate cancer versus systematic 12-core transrectal ultrasound biopsy. Eur Urol. 2013 Nov;64(5):713-719. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.05.059. Epub 2013 Jun 12. PubMed 23787357 ↗
  • Wegelin O, van Melick HHE, Hooft L, Bosch JLHR, Reitsma HB, Barentsz JO, Somford DM. Comparing Three Different Techniques for Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Prostate Biopsies: A Systematic Review of In-bore versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging-transrectal Ultrasound fusion versus Cognitive Registration. Is There a Preferred Technique? Eur Urol. 2017 Apr;71(4):517-531. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.07.041. Epub 2016 Aug 25. PubMed 27568655 ↗
  • Wei C, Szewczyk-Bieda M, Bates AS, Donnan PT, Rauchhaus P, Gandy S, Ragupathy SKA, Singh P, Coll K, Serhan J, Wilson J, Nabi G. Multicenter Randomized Trial Assessing MRI and Image-guided Biopsy for Suspected Prostate Cancer: The MULTIPROS Study. Radiology. 2023 Jul;308(1):e221428. doi: 10.1148/radiol.221428. PubMed 37489992 ↗
  • Annamalai A, Fustok JN, Beltran-Perez J, Rashad AT, Krane LS, Triche BL. Interobserver Agreement and Accuracy in Interpreting mpMRI of the Prostate: a Systematic Review. Curr Urol Rep. 2022 Jan;23(1):1-10. doi: 10.1007/s11934-022-01084-y. Epub 2022 Feb 28. PubMed 35226257 ↗
  • Schergna E, Armani M. [Muscular diseases: epidemiology of progressive muscular dystrophies]. Minerva Med. 1981 Apr 28;72(17):1045-9. Italian. PubMed 6939970 ↗
  • Lenfant L, Beitone C, Troccaz J, Roupret M, Seisen T, Voros S, Mozer PC. Learning curve for fusion magnetic resonance imaging targeted prostate biopsy and three-dimensional transrectal ultrasonography segmentation. BJU Int. 2024 Jun;133(6):709-716. doi: 10.1111/bju.16287. Epub 2024 Jan 31. PubMed 38294145 ↗
  • Halstuch D, Baniel J, Lifshitz D, Sela S, Ber Y, Margel D. Characterizing the learning curve of MRI-US fusion prostate biopsies. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2019 Dec;22(4):546-551. doi: 10.1038/s41391-019-0137-2. Epub 2019 Mar 6. PubMed 30842585 ↗
  • Kasabwala K, Patel N, Cricco-Lizza E, Shimpi AA, Weng S, Buchmann RM, Motanagh S, Wu Y, Banerjee S, Khani F, Margolis DJ, Robinson BD, Hu JC. The Learning Curve for Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Ultrasound Fusion-guided Prostate Biopsy. Eur Urol Oncol. 2019 Mar;2(2):135-140. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2018.07.005. Epub 2018 Aug 17. PubMed 31017088 ↗
  • Bhattacharya I, Khandwala YS, Vesal S, Shao W, Yang Q, Soerensen SJC, Fan RE, Ghanouni P, Kunder CA, Brooks JD, Hu Y, Rusu M, Sonn GA. A review of artificial intelligence in prostate cancer detection on imaging. Ther Adv Urol. 2022 Oct 10;14:17562872221128791. doi: 10.1177/17562872221128791. eCollection 2022 Jan-Dec. PubMed 36249889 ↗
  • Lomas DJ, Ahmed HU. All change in the prostate cancer diagnostic pathway. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2020 Jun;17(6):372-381. doi: 10.1038/s41571-020-0332-z. Epub 2020 Feb 28. PubMed 32112055 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on May 6, 2025, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT06360523
Lead sponsor
Chinese University of Hong Kong
Responsible party
CHIU Ka Fung Peter (Associate Professor, Chinese University of Hong Kong) — Principal investigator
First posted
Apr 11, 2024
Start date
Jun 14, 2024
Primary completion
Dec 31, 2027 (estimated)
Completion
Mar 31, 2028 (estimated)
Last update
May 6, 2025

Study contacts

Peter Ka-Fung CHIU, FRCS, PhD
Contact
peterchiu@surgery.cuhk.edu.hk
35052625
Peter CHIU, FRCS, PhD
principal investigator · Chinese University of Hong Kong

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

Contact study team

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion