Connect
← Return to Dr. Bert Vorstman skeptical of any Pc treatment. What do you think?
Discussion
Dr. Bert Vorstman skeptical of any Pc treatment. What do you think?
Prostate Cancer | Last Active: 1 hour ago | Replies (45)Comment receiving replies
@brianjarvis you give such amazing answers I'm wearing out the like and helpful buttons, I hope that's OK with you! I have a trendy question maybe you've run across answers for. When you talk about Gleason scores being expert opinion of images in a microscope - what might you (or others) have heard about AI system evaluations of these biopsy images?
Medical image analysis is something they've been working AI systems with since the 1980s (maybe longer), it seems to be everywhere, so I imagine there are people out there working on it? Thanks.
OK, I should also Google it myself, right? And here's the AI conclusion on this AI question:
Current Status & Future
AI algorithms are reaching pathologist-level performance and are becoming mature for clinical use.
Integration into clinical workflows is ongoing, with AI acting as a "digital colleague" to support diagnosis and prognosis.
Research continues to compare commercial vs. research-based AI and validate performance in diverse real-world settings.
Replies to "@brianjarvis you give such amazing answers I'm wearing out the like and helpful buttons, I hope..."
Connect
@carbcounter I’m sure that ever since Dr. Gleason identified different patterns in prostate cancer cells in the 1960s, that continued improvements in technology have enhanced those abilities. That will continue to improve going forward with AI (as long as funding for clinical trials continues).
Even with MRIs, initially there were 1T MRIs, then 2T, 2.5T, and 3T MRIs (which most of us get these days). Several research hospitals have 7T MRIs; there’s even an 11T MRI now.
Technology continues to advance. AI will no doubt be part of that advancement.