Prostate MRI Analysis by Radiologists and Artificial Intelligence - Disease Identification and Guided Management (PARADIGM)

June 9, 2026 updated by: University College, London

A Study Assessing Whether Artificial Intelligence is Non-inferior to Radiologists in the Diagnosis of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer.

Prostate cancer is the most common male cancer in 112 countries and makes up 7% of global cancer cases, and is the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in men.

Normally, men with suspected prostate cancer undergo a prostate MRI, and then a Radiologist would review this scan to identify any suspicious areas for cancer within the prostate. Prostate MRI interpretation, however, is an expert skill with a steep learning curve, and internationally, there is a growing shortage of Radiologists.

The PARADIGM trial aims to assess if AI can perform just as well as Radiologists in interpretating prostate MRI scans to identify prostate cancer. Enrolled participants will undergo a prostate MRI, which is the normal method used for investigating suspected prostate cancer. AI and a Radiologist will both interpret the MRI, without knowledge of each other's interpretation. Once both reports have been made, the Radiologist will be asked to produce a third, combined report.

If there is a suspicious area in the prostate identified either by AI or the Radiologist, targeted biopsies will be performed. f there are no suspicious areas on the MRI and if you are at low risk of harbouring cancer, which occurs in about 30% of men, then no biopsy will be taken at all.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Not yet recruiting

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Detailed Description

Aim: To assess whether artificial intelligence is non-inferior to radiologists in the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer on MRI.

Objectives

Primary

1. To compare the proportion of men who have clinically significant prostate cancer detected on MRI using AI ± targeted biopsy with radiologists ± targeted biopsy.

Secondary

  1. To compare the proportion of men who have clinically insignificant prostate cancer detected on MRI using AI ± targeted biopsy with radiologists ± targeted biopsy.
  2. To compare the proportion of men with non-suspicious MRIs for AI vs radiologists.
  3. To compare the proportion of men with indeterminately scored MRI as reported by AI vs radiologists.
  4. To compare the diagnostic test performance of AI vs radiologist.
  5. To compare the additive value of AI when used together with a radiologist interpretation (summative of all identified lesions) compared to a radiologist alone.
  6. To compare the additive value of AI when used together with a radiologist interpretation (where the radiologist can interact with the AI system by accepting or rejecting AI-identified lesions) compared to a radiologist alone.
  7. To determine the frequency of AI failures.
  8. To compare treatment eligibility decisions between AI and Radiologist.
  9. To compare the cost-effectiveness of unblinded AI interpreted by the radiologist compared to radiologist alone for prostate cancer detection, and AI alone vs. radiologist alone, and a 3-arm analysis considering all three.

Design:

Prospective, international, within-patient, multi-centre, level-1 evidnece trial in participants referred to hospital with a clinical suspicion of prostate cancer.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Interventional

Enrollment (Estimated)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
500

Phase

Phase

The stage of a clinical trial studying a drug or biological product, based on definitions developed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The phase is based on the study's objective, the number of participants, and other characteristics. There are five phases: Early Phase 1 (formerly listed as Phase 0), Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 4. Not Applicable is used to describe trials without FDA-defined phases, including trials of devices or behavioral interventions.
  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Contact

Study Contact

The name and contact information for the person who can answer enrollment questions for a clinical study. Each location where the study is being conducted may also have a specific contact, who may be better able to answer those questions.

Study Contact Backup

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  1. Men at least 18 years of age referred with clinical suspicion of prostate cancer
  2. Serum PSA ≤ 20 ng/mL
  3. Fit to undergo all procedures listed in the protocol
  4. Able to provide written informed consent

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Prior prostate biopsy
  2. Prior prostate MRI on a previous encounter*
  3. Prior treatment for prostate cancer
  4. Contraindication to MRI (e.g. claustrophobia, pacemaker)
  5. Metalwork that would give rise to artefact on MRI (e.g. hip prosthesis, pelvic/spinal metalwork)
  6. Contraindication to prostate biopsy

  7. Unfit to undergo any procedures listed in protocol

    • An MRI on a previous encounter means a previous prostate MRI which has been seen by a doctor and has been used to inform patient management at the time of the original MRI.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Diagnostic
  • Allocation: Non-Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Single Group Assignment
  • Masking: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm

Participant Group / Arm

A group or subgroup of participants in a clinical trial that receives a specific intervention/treatment, or no intervention, according to the trial's protocol.
Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.
Active Comparator: Radiologist interpretation of MRI +/- prostate biopsy
Radiologist Interpretation
Diagnostic test: Radiologist interpretation
Radiologist will interpret the prostate MRI (as per standard of care)
Experimental: AI interpretation of MRI +/- prostate biopsy
AI Interpretation
Diagnostic test: AI (Lucida Pi) interpretation
AI algorithm that will interpretate the prostate MRI

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Proportion of men with clinically significant cancer
Time Frame: When biopsy results available, at an expected average of 30 days post-biopsy
Proportion of men with clinically significant cancer detected (any pattern 4 disease on any core (i.e. Gleason Grade ≥ 3+4/Gleason grade group ≥2).
When biopsy results available, at an expected average of 30 days post-biopsy

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Proportion of men with clinically insignificant cancer
Time Frame: When biopsy results available, at an expected average of 30 days post-biopsy
Proportion of men with clinically insignificant cancer detected (Gleason grade 3+3/Gleason grade group 1).
When biopsy results available, at an expected average of 30 days post-biopsy
Proportion of men with non-suspicious MRIs
Time Frame: When MRI results available, at an expected average of 30 days post-MRI
Proportion of men with non-suspicious MRIs for AI vs Radiologists
When MRI results available, at an expected average of 30 days post-MRI
Proportion of MRIs with indeterminate scores.
Time Frame: When MRI results available, at an expected average of 30 days post-MRI
Proportion of men with indeterminately scored MRI as reported by AI vs radiologists
When MRI results available, at an expected average of 30 days post-MRI
Agreement between AI and Radiologist in score of suspicion
Time Frame: When MRI results available, at an expected average of 30 days post-MRI
Compare the proportion of MRIs with concordant scores between AI and Radiologist in score of suspicion
When MRI results available, at an expected average of 30 days post-MRI
Diagnostic test performance characteristics (AI versus Radiologist)
Time Frame: When biopsy results available, at an expected average of 30 days post-biopsy
Test performance characteristics for AI and Radiologists, including sensitivity, specificity, area under the receive operating characteristic curve, positive predictive value and negative predictive value.
When biopsy results available, at an expected average of 30 days post-biopsy
Diagnostic test performance characteristics (AI plus Radiologist)
Time Frame: When biopsy results available, at an expected average of 30 days post-biopsy
Test performance characteristics of AI in combination with Radiologist (summative of all identified lesions) compared to a radiologist alone, including sensitivity, specificity, area under the receive operating characteristic curve, positive predictive value and negative predictive value.
When biopsy results available, at an expected average of 30 days post-biopsy
Diagnostic test performance characteristics (AI-assisted Radiologist)
Time Frame: When biopsy results available, at an expected average of 30 days post-biopsy
Test performance characteristics of AI in combination with Radiologist (where the radiologist can interact with the AI system by accepting or rejecting AI-identified lesions) compared to a radiologist alone, including sensitivity, specificity, area under the receive operating characteristic curve, positive predictive value and negative predictive value.
When biopsy results available, at an expected average of 30 days post-biopsy
Significant cancer detected by peri-lesional biopsies
Time Frame: When biopsy results available, at an expected average of 30 days post-biopsy
Proportion of patients with significant cancer detected taking into account peri-lesional biopsies of AI and Radiologist declared lesions.
When biopsy results available, at an expected average of 30 days post-biopsy
Significant cancer detected by systematic biopsies
Time Frame: When biopsy results available, at an expected average of 30 days post-biopsy
Proportion of patients with significant cancer detected by systematic biopsies
When biopsy results available, at an expected average of 30 days post-biopsy
Frequency of AI failures
Time Frame: When MRI results available, at an expected average of 30 days post-MRI
Proportion of patients where AI was unable to interpret the MRI scan
When MRI results available, at an expected average of 30 days post-MRI
Treatment eligibility decisions
Time Frame: When biopsy results available, at an expected average of 30 days post-biopsy
Proportion of patients where treatment eligibility changed between AI and Radiologist
When biopsy results available, at an expected average of 30 days post-biopsy
Cost-efffectiveness
Time Frame: At an expected average of 30 days post-intervention
Cost-effectiveness of unblinded AI interpreted by the radiologist compared to radiologist alone in detecting significant prostate cancer, and AI alone vs. radiologist alone, and a 3-arm analysis considering all three.
At an expected average of 30 days post-intervention

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
University College, London

Collaborators

Collaborators

An organization other than the sponsor that provides support for a clinical study. This support may include activities related to funding, design, implementation, data analysis, or reporting.
Lucida Medical Ltd

Investigators

Investigators

A researcher involved in a clinical study. Related terms include site principal investigator, site sub-investigator, study chair, study director, and study principal investigator.
  • Study Chair: Veeru Kasivisvanathan, MBBS BSc FRCS MSc PGCert PhD, Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, UK
  • Study Chair: Doug Pendse, MB ChB MD (Res) MRCS FRCR, Department of Radiology, Universiy College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, UK

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Estimated)

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
October 1, 2026

Primary Completion (Estimated)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
January 1, 2029

Study Completion (Estimated)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
January 1, 2029

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
June 9, 2026

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
June 9, 2026

First Posted (Actual)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
June 15, 2026

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
June 15, 2026

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
June 9, 2026

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
June 1, 2026

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • 338739

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

YES

IPD Plan Description

Anonymised data will be available at request for bona fide researchers with important research questions subject to approval by the study steering committee.

IPD Sharing Time Frame

Data will become available 1 year after publication of the main study results.

IPD Sharing Access Criteria

A study steering committee will review all requests for access to the data and will make decisions on whether or not to grant access to bona fide researchers based on the importance of the research question being asked, ensuring analysis is non overlapping with existing analyses and planned analyses.

IPD Sharing Supporting Information Type

  • STUDY_PROTOCOL
  • SAP

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Prostate CA

Clinical Trials on Radiologist interpretation

Search Similar Trials

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

Conditions

Rare Diseases

Drug Interventions

Dietary Supplements

Sponsor/Collaborators

Locations

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings