78 Exploratory radiomics analysis in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma treated with durvalumab alone or combined with tremelimumab or bevacizumab
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background The Phase 2 Study 22 [ NCT02519348] demonstrated the efficacy of durvalumab alone (D) or combined with tremelimumab (D+T) or bevacizumab (D+B) in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).1 2 We analyzed baseline and end-of-treatment (EOT) abdominal CT scans to explore associations between image features and clinical outcomes, including overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and lesion-specific responses.Methods Arterial phase CTs from 124 patients, free of artifacts, were reviewed; measurable HCC lesions (>10 mm) and entire liver were delineated by radiologists. Radiomic features from tumor, peri-tumoral regions, and liver were extracted.OS and PFS were modeled using Cox regression with baseline radiomic features of liver or lesions. Performances were reported as concordance index (c-index).For patients with measurable tumors at both baseline and EOT, individual lesion response was defined by volumetric change (growing/shrinking) and exponential decay/growth rates were estimated. Multivariate mixed-effect models were assessed to create a classification model (60-40 train-test split) to distinguish growing/shrinking lesions using baseline radiomic features of lesions, with performance reported as AUC.Results Among 124 patients, 93 (SR-1) had measurable tumors with 490 lesions at baseline; 31 (SR-2) were determined not measurable or ‘diffuse’. Median tumor burdens were 112 cm 3 (D, n=39), 66 cm3 (D+T, n=32), and 39 cm3 (D+B, n=22).OS was shorter for SR-2 than SR-1 for D and D+T (424 and 217 days respectively), with a similar trend observed for B+D. Univariate analysis identified eight liver-based radiomic features associated with SR-2.A survival model using liver radiomic features had a c-index of 0.61 (124 patients, 3-fold cross-validation), surpassing lesion-based OS models. For PFS, the best performance was achieved using radiomic features of the largest lesion (c-index=0.62, SR-1).In 57 patients from SR-1 with suitable EOT scan, 298 lesions were tracked. Combination therapy yielded a higher tumor decay rate than D-monotherapy, with similar growth-rates for non-responding lesions across treatments. In responding lesions, median tumor half-life decreased from ~670 days to ~215 days (combination arms). A baseline mixed-effects model achieved AUC of 0.86 in lesion response classification.Conclusions Deep lesion level analyses revealed the impact of combination therapy in shrinking lesions, complementing RECIST assessment. High-throughput radiomic detection of the negative prognostic feature ‘diffuse’ appears feasible. For immunotherapy response/resistance, baseline radiomic features may predict OS, PFS, lesion-level outcome and could be utilized to identify candidate features. Limitations include sample size and potential overfitting, requiring validation in a larger cohort.Acknowledgements Image quality control, radiology reads, segmentations, and statistical analysis was performed by Radiomics.bioTrial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02519348References Kelley RK, Sangro B, Harris W, Ikeda M, Okusaka T, Kang YK, et al. Safety, efficacy, and pharmacodynamics of tremelimumab plus durvalumab for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: randomized expansion of a phase I/II study. J Clin Oncol 2021;39:2991-3001.Lim HY, Heo J, Kim T-Y, Tai WMD, Kang Y-K, Lau G, et al. Safety and efficacy of durvalumab plus bevacizumab in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: results from the phase 2 study 22 (NCT02519348). J Clin Oncol 2022; 40: abs 436.Ethics Approval This open-label, phase I/II study was conducted at 19 sites in nine countries (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02519348) according to the Declaration of Helsinki. All patients provided written informed consent. Protocol approval was obtained from institutional review boards or ethics committees at each site.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».