Expanding access to administrative data: the case of tax authorities in Finland and the UK

We discuss typical issues in getting access to and using high‐quality administrative tax data for research purposes. We discuss research involving both quasi‐ and field experiments implemented together with the tax authority. We reflect on practical solutions that promote co‐creation of knowledge and reduce information asymmetries between researchers and practitioners, based on our experiences of working with the tax authorities in Finland and the UK. We provide examples of how to improve the overall research environment focusing on two successful case studies: the HMRC Datalab in the UK and the remote access to data from Statistics Finland. We propose two key arguments to persuade policymakers elsewhere to follow similar practices: improved data security and equality of access across researchers

The effect of percutaneous transluminal angioplasty of superficial femoral artery on pulse wave features

We aimed to analyze the effects of percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) of the superficial femoral artery (SFA) on arterial pulse waves (PWs). Altogether 24 subjects i.e. 48 lower limbs were examined including 26 treated lower limbs having abnormal ankle-to-brachial pressure index (ABI) (ABI1.3) and 22 non-treated lower limbs. The measurements were conducted in pre-, peri- and post-treatment phases as well as in follow-up visit after 1 month. Both ABI and toe pressures measured by standard equipment were used as reference values. PW-derived parameters include ratios of different peaks of the PW and time differences between them as well as aging index. Both treated and non-treated limbs were compared in pre- and post-treatment as well as follow-up visit conditions. The results were evaluated in terms of statistical tests, Bland-Altman-plots, free-marginal multirater κ-analysis and multiple linear regression analysis. PTA was found to cause small changes to the studied PW-derived parameters of the treated limb which were observed immediately after the treatment, but the changes were more pronounced in the follow-up visit. In addition, we observed that the endovascular instrumentation itself does not cause significant changes to the PW-derived parameters. The results show that PW-analysis could be a useful tool for monitoring the treatment-effect of the PTA. However, because the pre-treatment differences of the treated and non-treated limb were small, further studies with subjects having no arterial diseases are required. The study demonstrates the potential of the PW analysis in monitoring vascular abnormalities.acceptedVersionPeer reviewe

Detection of Prostate Cancer Using Biparametric Prostate MRI, Radiomics, and Kallikreins : A Retrospective Multicenter Study of Men With a Clinical Suspicion of Prostate Cancer

Background Accurate detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa), Gleason Grade Group >= 2, remains a challenge. Prostate MRI radiomics and blood kallikreins have been proposed as tools to improve the performance of biparametric MRI (bpMRI). Purpose To develop and validate radiomics and kallikrein models for the detection of csPCa. Study Type Retrospective. Population A total of 543 men with a clinical suspicion of csPCa, 411 (76%, 411/543) had kallikreins available and 360 (88%, 360/411) did not take 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors. Two data splits into training, validation (split 1: single center, n = 72; split 2: random 50% of pooled datasets from all four centers), and testing (split 1: 4 centers, n = 288; split 2: remaining 50%) were evaluated. Field strength/Sequence A 3 T/1.5 T, TSE T2-weighted imaging, 3x SE DWI. Assessment In total, 20,363 radiomic features calculated from manually delineated whole gland (WG) and bpMRI suspicion lesion masks were evaluated in addition to clinical parameters, prostate-specific antigen, four kallikreins, MRI-based qualitative (PI-RADSv2.1/IMPROD bpMRI Likert) scores. Statistical Tests For the detection of csPCa, area under receiver operating curve (AUC) was calculated using the DeLong's method. A multivariate analysis was conducted to determine the predictive power of combining variables. The values of P-value < 0.05 were considered significant. Results The highest prediction performance was achieved by IMPROD bpMRI Likert and PI-RADSv2.1 score with AUC = 0.85 and 0.85 in split 1, 0.85 and 0.83 in split 2, respectively. bpMRI WG and/or kallikreins demonstrated AUCs ranging from 0.62 to 0.73 in split 1 and from 0.68 to 0.76 in split 2. AUC of bpMRI lesion-derived radiomics model was not statistically different to IMPROD bpMRI Likert score (split 1: AUC = 0.83, P-value = 0.306; split 2: AUC = 0.83, P-value = 0.488). Data Conclusion The use of radiomics and kallikreins failed to outperform PI-RADSv2.1/IMPROD bpMRI Likert and their combination did not lead to further performance gains. Level of Evidence 1 Technical Efficacy Stage 2Peer reviewe

Individualised non-contrast MRI-based risk estimation and shared decision-making in men with a suspicion of prostate cancer : Protocol for multicentre randomised controlled trial (multi-IMPROD V.2.0)

Introduction European Association of Urology and UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines recommend that all men with suspicions of prostate cancer should undergo prebiopsy contrast enhanced, that is, multiparametric prostate MRI. Subsequent prostate biopsies should also be performed if MRI is positive, that is, Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) scores 3-5. However, several retrospective post hoc analyses have shown that this approach still leads to many unnecessary biopsy procedures. For example, 88%-96% of men with PI-RADS, three findings are still diagnosed with clinically non-significant prostate cancer or no cancer at all. Methods and analysis This is a prospective, randomised, controlled, multicentre trial, being conducted in Finland, to demonstrate non-inferiority in clinically significant cancer detection rates among men undergoing prostate biopsies post-MRI and men undergoing prostate biopsies post-MRI only after a shared decision based on individualised risk estimation. Men without previous diagnosis of prostate cancer and with abnormal digital rectal examination findings and/or prostate-specific antigen between 2.5 ug/L and 20.0 ug/L are included. We aim to recruit 830 men who are randomised at a 1:1 ratio into control (all undergo biopsies after MRI) and intervention arms (the decision to perform biopsies is based on risk estimation and shared decision-making). The primary outcome of the study is the proportion of men with clinically significant prostate cancer (Gleason 4+3 prostate cancer or higher). We will also compare the overall biopsy rate, benign biopsy rate and the detection of non-significant prostate cancer between the two study groups. Ethics and dissemination The study (protocol V.2.0, 4 January 2021) was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Hospital District of Southwest Finland (IORG number: 0001744, IBR number: 00002216; trial number: 99/1801/2019). Participants are required to provide written informed consent. Full reports of this study will be submitted to peer-reviewed journals, mainly urology and radiology. Trial registration number NCT04287088; the study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov.publishedVersionPeer reviewe

Individualised non-contrast MRI-based risk estimation and shared decision-making in men with a suspicion of prostate cancer: protocol for multicentre randomised controlled trial (multi-IMPROD V.2.0)

Introduction European Association of Urology and UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines recommend that all men with suspicions of prostate cancer should undergo prebiopsy contrast enhanced, that is, multiparametric prostate MRI. Subsequent prostate biopsies should also be performed if MRI is positive, that is, Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) scores 3-5. However, several retrospective post hoc analyses have shown that this approach still leads to many unnecessary biopsy procedures. For example, 88%-96% of men with PI-RADS, three findings are still diagnosed with clinically non-significant prostate cancer or no cancer at all.Methods and analysis This is a prospective, randomised, controlled, multicentre trial, being conducted in Finland, to demonstrate non-inferiority in clinically significant cancer detection rates among men undergoing prostate biopsies post-MRI and men undergoing prostate biopsies post-MRI only after a shared decision based on individualised risk estimation. Men without previous diagnosis of prostate cancer and with abnormal digital rectal examination findings and/or prostate-specific antigen between 2.5 ug/L and 20.0 ug/L are included. We aim to recruit 830 men who are randomised at a 1:1 ratio into control (all undergo biopsies after MRI) and intervention arms (the decision to perform biopsies is based on risk estimation and shared decision-making). The primary outcome of the study is the proportion of men with clinically significant prostate cancer (Gleason 4+3 prostate cancer or higher). We will also compare the overall biopsy rate, benign biopsy rate and the detection of non-significant prostate cancer between the two study groups.Ethics and dissemination The study (protocol V.2.0, 4 January 2021) was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Hospital District of Southwest Finland (IORG number: 0001744, IBR number: 00002216; trial number: 99/1801/2019). Participants are required to provide written informed consent. Full reports of this study will be submitted to peer-reviewed journals, mainly urology and radiology.</p

How to read biparametric MRI in men with a clinical suspicious of prostate cancer: Pictorial review for beginners with public access to imaging, clinical and histopathological database

Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) is increasingly being used in men with a clinical suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa). Performing prostate MRI without the use of an intravenous contrast (IV) agent in men with a clinical suspicion of PCa can lead to reduced MRI scan time. Enabling a large array of different medical providers (from mid-level to specialized radiologists) to evaluate and potentially report prostate MRI in men with a clinical suspicion of PCa with a high accuracy could be one way to enable wide adoption of prostate MRI in men with a clinical suspicion of PCa. The aim of this pictorial review is to provide an insight into acquisition, quality control and reporting of prostate MRI performed without IV contrast agent in men with a clinical suspicion of PCa, aimed specifically at radiologists starting reporting prostate MRI, urologists, urology/radiology residents and mid-level medical providers without experience in reporting prostate MRI. Free public access (http://petiv.utu.fi/improd/and http://petiv.utu.fi/multiimprod/) to complete datasets of 161 and 338 men is provided. The imaging datasets are accompanied by clinical, laboratory and histopathological findings. Several topics are simplified in order to provide a solid base for the development of skills needed for an unsupervised review and potential reporting of prostate MRI in men with a clinical suspicion of PCa. The current review represents the first step towards enabling a large array of different medical providers to review and report accurately prostate MRI performed without IV contrast agent in men with a clinical suspicion of PCa

Validation of IMPROD biparametric MRI in men with clinically suspected prostate cancer: A prospective multi-institutional trial

Background: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) combined with targeted biopsy (TB) is increasingly used in men with clinically suspected prostate cancer (PCa), but the long acquisition times, high costs, and inter-center/reader variability of routine multiparametric prostate MRI limit its wider adoption.Methods and findings: The aim was to validate a previously developed unique MRI acquisition and reporting protocol, IMPROD biparametric MRI (bpMRI) (NCT01864135), in men with a clinical suspicion of PCa in a multi-institutional trial (NCT02241122). IMPROD bpMRI has average acquisition time of 15 minutes (no endorectal coil, no intravenous contrast use) and consists of T2-weighted imaging and 3 separate diffusion-weighed imaging acquisitions. Between February 1, 2015, and March 31, 2017, 364 men with a clinical suspicion of PCa were enrolled at 4 institutions in Finland. Men with an equivocal to high suspicion (IMPROD bpMRI Likert score 3-5) of PCa had 2 TBs of up to 2 lesions followed by a systematic biopsy (SB). Men with a low to very low suspicion (IMPROD bpMRI Likert score 1-2) had only SB. All data and protocols are freely available. The primary outcome of the trial was diagnostic accuracy-including overall accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), and positive predictive value-of IMPROD bpMRI for clinically significant PCa (SPCa), which was defined as a Gleason score >= 3 + 4 (Gleason grade group 2 or higher). In total, 338 (338/364, 93%) prospectively enrolled men completed the trial. The accuracy and NPV of IMPROD bpMRI for SPCa were 70% (113/161) and 95% (71/75) (95% CI 87%-98%), respectively. Restricting the biopsy to men with equivocal to highly suspicious IMPROD bpMRI findings would have resulted in a 22% (75/338) reduction in the number of men undergoing biopsy while missing 4 (3%, 4/146) men with SPCa. The main limitation is uncertainty about the true PCa prevalence in the study cohort, since some of the men may have PCa despite having negative biopsy findings.Conclusions: IMPROD bpMRI demonstrated a high NPV for SPCa in men with a clinical suspicion of PCa in this prospective multi-institutional clinical trial.</p

Validation of IMPROD biparametric MRI in men with clinically suspected prostate cancer : A prospective multi-institutional trial

Background Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) combined with targeted biopsy (TB) is increasingly used in men with clinically suspected prostate cancer (PCa), but the long acquisition times, high costs, and inter-center/reader variability of routine multiparametric prostate MRI limit its wider adoption. Methods and findings The aim was to validate a previously developed unique MRI acquisition and reporting protocol, IMPROD biparametric MRI (bpMRI) (NCT01864135), in men with a clinical suspicion of PCa in a multi-institutional trial (NCT02241122). IMPROD bpMRI has average acquisition time of 15 minutes (no endorectal coil, no intravenous contrast use) and consists of T2-weighted imaging and 3 separate diffusion-weighed imaging acquisitions. Between February 1, 2015, and March 31, 2017, 364 men with a clinical suspicion of PCa were enrolled at 4 institutions in Finland. Men with an equivocal to high suspicion (IMPROD bpMRI Likert score 3-5) of PCa had 2 TBs of up to 2 lesions followed by a systematic biopsy (SB). Men with a low to very low suspicion (IMPROD bpMRI Likert score 1-2) had only SB. All data and protocols are freely available. The primary outcome of the trial was diagnostic accuracy-including overall accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), and positive predictive value-of IMPROD bpMRI for clinically significant PCa (SPCa), which was defined as a Gleason score >= 3 + 4 (Gleason grade group 2 or higher). In total, 338 (338/364, 93%) prospectively enrolled men completed the trial. The accuracy and NPV of IMPROD bpMRI for SPCa were 70% (113/161) and 95% (71/75) (95% CI 87%-98%), respectively. Restricting the biopsy to men with equivocal to highly suspicious IMPROD bpMRI findings would have resulted in a 22% (75/338) reduction in the number of men undergoing biopsy while missing 4 (3%, 4/146) men with SPCa. The main limitation is uncertainty about the true PCa prevalence in the study cohort, since some of the men may have PCa despite having negative biopsy findings. Conclusions IMPROD bpMRI demonstrated a high NPV for SPCa in men with a clinical suspicion of PCa in this prospective multi-institutional clinical trial.Peer reviewe