Quantum-Enhanced Radiomics for Early Detection and Risk Stratification of Prostate Cancer Using Multiparametric MRI

Authors

  • Meateio Wailters Department of Computer Science, University of North Texas, Denton, TX, USA.
  • Jerome Oliver Department of Computer Science, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA.

Keywords:

quantum computing, radiomics, prostate cancer, multiparametric MRI, early detection, risk stratification, system architecture, clinical deployment

Abstract

The integration of quantum computing with radiomic analysis of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) represents a transformative frontier in the early detection and risk stratification of prostate cancer. This paper presents a systems-level investigation of quantum-enhanced radiomics, focusing not on individual algorithmic performance but on the architectural, governance, infrastructural, and policy dimensions that govern the translation of such hybrid computational pipelines into safe and equitable clinical practice. We analyze the structural trade-offs inherent in designing federated learning architectures that couple high-dimensional radiomic feature extraction from prostate mpMRI with variational quantum circuits, tensor network encodings, and quantum kernel methods. The discussion encompasses data provenance across heterogeneous scanner ecosystems, the robustness of quantum-classical decision support systems under distributional shift, and the ethical imperatives of bias mitigation across diverse populations. Further, we examine deployment pathways that must accommodate hospital IT constraints, real-time inference demands, and lifecycle sustainability including model updating and hardware evolution. Through a comparative analysis of centralized, decentralized, and hybrid quantum-cloud configurations, we delineate how early quantum advantage claims intersect with clinical workflow burden, interpretability requirements, and regulatory frameworks such as the FDA’s predetermined change control plans. The paper argues that the success of quantum-enhanced radiomics will depend less on quantum speedup alone and more on the deliberate design of socio-technical infrastructures that prioritize fairness, longitudinal validation, and seamless integration into existing diagnostic pathways.

References

1. Gillies, R. J., Kinahan, P. E., & Hricak, H. (2016). Radiomics: Images are more than pictures, they are data. Radiology, 278(2), 563–577. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2015151169

2. Lambin, P., Leijenaar, R. T. H., Deist, T. M., Peerlings, J., de Jong, E. E. C., van Timmeren, J., ... & Walsh, S. (2017). Radiomics: The bridge between medical imaging and personalized medicine. Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology, 14(12), 749–762. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrclinonc.2017.141

3. Turkbey, B., Rosenkrantz, A. B., Haider, M. A., Padhani, A. R., Villeirs, G., Macura, K. J., ... & Weinreb, J. C. (2019). Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2.1: 2019 update of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2. European Urology, 76(3), 340–351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2019.02.033

4. Stoyanova, R., Takhar, M., Tschudi, Y., Ford, J. C., Solórzano, G., Erho, N., ... & Punnen, S. (2016). Prostate cancer radiomics and the promise of radiogenomics. Translational Cancer Research, 5(4), 432–447. https://doi.org/10.21037/tcr.2016.06.20

5. Biamonte, J., Wittek, P., Pancotti, N., Rebentrost, P., Wiebe, N., & Lloyd, S. (2017). Quantum machine learning. Nature, 549(7671), 195–202. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature23474

6. Havlíček, V., Córcoles, A. D., Temme, K., Harrow, A. W., Kandala, A., Chow, J. M., & Gambetta, J. M. (2019). Supervised learning with quantum-enhanced feature spaces. Nature, 567(7747), 209–212. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-0980-2

7. Schuld, M., & Killoran, N. (2019). Quantum machine learning in feature Hilbert spaces. Physical Review Letters, 122(4), 040504. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.122.040504

8. Rieke, N., Hancox, J., Li, W., Milletarì, F., Roth, H. R., Albarqouni, S., ... & Cardoso, M. J. (2020). The future of digital health with federated learning. NPJ Digital Medicine, 3(1), 119. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-020-00323-1

9. Kairouz, P., McMahan, H. B., Avent, B., Bellet, A., Bennis, M., Bhagoji, A. N., ... & Zhao, S. (2021). Advances and open problems in federated learning. Foundations and Trends in Machine Learning, 14(1–2), 1–210. https://doi.org/10.1561/2200000083

10. Chen, P., Safari, M., Barker-Clarke, R., Yang, X., & Scott, J. G. (2026, April). Prostate cancer classification using quantum machine‑learning on multiparametric MRI. In Medical Imaging 2026: Imaging Informatics (Vol. 13930, pp. 320-327). SPIE.

11. Liu, Y., Zhang, S., & Zhou, L. (2022). A survey on quantum federated learning: Challenges and opportunities. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, 34(11), 8865–8882. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNNLS.2022.3208260

12. McClean, J. R., Boixo, S., Smelyanskiy, V. N., Babbush, R., & Neven, H. (2018). Barren plateaus in quantum neural network training landscapes. Nature Communications, 9(1), 4812. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-07090-4

13. Beaulieu-Jones, B. K., Yuan, W., Finlayson, S. G., & Kohane, I. S. (2020). Privacy-preserving quality control of neuroimaging data in federated environments. Patterns, 1(7), 100129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2020.100129

14. Kaissis, G. A., Makowski, M. R., Rückert, D., & Braren, R. F. (2020). Secure, privacy-preserving and federated machine learning in medical imaging. Nature Machine Intelligence, 2(6), 305–311. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-020-0186-1

15. Papanikolaou, N., Matos, C., & Koh, D. M. (2020). How to develop a meaningful radiomic signature for clinical use in oncologic imaging. Cancer Imaging, 20(1), 33. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40644-020-00311-4

16. Saria, S., & Subbaswamy, A. (2019). Tutorial: Safe and reliable machine learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1904.07204.

17. Celi, L. A., Cellini, J., Charpignon, M. L., Dee, E. C., Dernoncourt, F., Eber, R., ... & Mitchell, W. G. (2022). Sources of bias in artificial intelligence that perpetuate healthcare disparities—A global review. PLOS Digital Health, 1(3), e0000022. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pdig.0000022

18. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2021). Artificial intelligence/machine learning (AI/ML)-based software as a medical device (SaMD) action plan. FDA.

19. Muehlematter, U. J., Daniore, P., & Vokinger, K. N. (2021). Approval of artificial intelligence and machine learning-based medical devices in the USA and Europe (2015–20): A comparative analysis. The Lancet Digital Health, 3(3), e195–e203. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2589-7500(20)30292-2

20. Jobson, D., Mar, V., & Freckleton, I. (2022). Legal and ethical considerations of artificial intelligence in skin cancer diagnosis. Australasian Journal of Dermatology, 63(1), e1–e5. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajd.13692

21. Suresh, H., & Guttag, J. (2021). A framework for understanding sources of harm throughout the machine learning life cycle. In Proceedings of the 1st ACM Conference on Equity and Access in Algorithms, Mechanisms, and Optimization (pp. 1–9). https://doi.org/10.1145/3465416.3483305

Downloads

Published

2026-08-14

How to Cite

Meateio Wailters, & Jerome Oliver. (2026). Quantum-Enhanced Radiomics for Early Detection and Risk Stratification of Prostate Cancer Using Multiparametric MRI. International Journal of Clinical and Translational Medicine, 1(1). Retrieved from https://ijctmed.org/index.php/home/article/view/185

Issue

Vol. 1 No. 1 (2026): International Journal of Clinical and Translational Medicine

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2026 International Journal of Clinical and Translational Medicine

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.