This preprint reports an updated machine-learning analysis of biopsy-based prostate cancer prediction in an expanded Japanese cohort from a single institution. The authors re-analyzed cases previously studied in 2019 to apply contemporary best practices in model evaluation, explicitly separating hyperparameter selection from performance estimation. Two diagnostic outcomes were modeled: detection of any prostate cancer at biopsy and detection of clinically significant prostate cancer defined as Gleason score ≥ 7.
The analytic dataset pooled all available biopsy episodes from the institutional database (n = 526 episodes). Two records were excluded: one with a non-binary outcome code and one with missing DRE data, leaving 524 biopsy episodes for analysis. Twenty-seven patients contributed more than one biopsy episode; the authors accounted for this in the validation strategy to prevent information leakage between training and testing partitions.
The study retained the same seven predictors used in the institution's earlier report: age, prior biopsy history, PSA, prostate volume, digital rectal examination (DRE) findings, and MRI diffusion-weighted imaging results in the peripheral and transition zones. Outcomes were binary: presence of any prostate cancer on biopsy, and presence of clinically significant disease (Gleason score ≥ 7). Observed prevalences in the 524-case sample were 55.7% (292/524) for any cancer and 39.7% (208/524) for Gleason ≥ 7.
To prevent leakage from patients contributing multiple biopsy episodes, model evaluation used patient-ID–grouped, stratified k-fold cross-validation (StratifiedGroupKFold from scikit-learn 1.8.0). Both 3-fold and 5-fold splits were employed, and each configuration was repeated across 10 random partitions to assess result stability. The methodology explicitly separates hyperparameter tuning from final performance estimation, addressing a limitation of the earlier report.
Four classifiers were trained and compared:
These models span linear regularized approaches, tree-based ensemble methods, and a simple neural-network architecture. Hyperparameter tuning and evaluation details were handled within the repeated group-stratified cross-validation framework.
Using repeated 5-fold cross-validation, gradient boosting achieved the highest discrimination among tested models. Reported mean AUCs were:
Random forest and regularized logistic regression produced similar discrimination, with AUCs reported in the 0.81–0.85 range across the two outcomes. The shallow multilayer perceptron performed worse and with less consistency than the three non-neural models: any-cancer AUC 0.671 and Gleason ≥ 7 AUC 0.742. Results were essentially unchanged when using 3-fold cross-validation.
These findings indicate that, in this cohort and with the chosen predictors and validation strategy, gradient boosting, random forest, and regularized logistic regression provided robust discrimination for both any prostate cancer and clinically significant disease.
The earlier 2019 report from the same institution described a deeper multilayer artificial neural network (five hidden layers) trained with TensorFlow 1.x on 334 patients. In the expanded sample and under the updated validation protocol, the simpler models (gradient boosting, random forest, logistic regression) matched or exceeded discrimination achieved by the previously reported ANN. The shallow single-hidden-layer multilayer perceptron in the present study did not outperform the simpler methods and performed worse than the deeper ANN reported in 2019.
The study reports ethical approval from the Ethical Committee of the Japan Organization of Occupational Health and Safety, Kanto Rosai Hospital (protocol code 201730, approved March 8, 2018) and states that all relevant patient consent and approvals were obtained. The authors note that the datasets are not publicly available due to ethical restrictions and participant privacy. The manuscript is posted as a preprint and has not undergone external peer review.
Limitations explicitly addressed in the source include the single-institution setting and the restricted set of seven predictors retained from the original report. The source does not report external validation on independent institutions or populations, and it states the data are not publicly available for external replication.
In this expanded cohort with rigorous group-stratified cross-validation, the authors conclude that regularized logistic regression, gradient boosting, and random forest discriminated biopsy-detected prostate cancer at least as well as the previously reported multilayer ANN while employing simpler model architectures and a methodology that separates hyperparameter tuning from performance estimation. The shallow neural network offered no advantage in this sample size. These results support the use of tree-based ensembles or regularized linear models as effective, parsimonious approaches for predicting biopsy outcomes in similar institutional datasets. The source notes that findings are preliminary pending peer review and that wider external validation was not reported in the manuscript.