Predictive radiomics signature for treatment response to nivolumab in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The anti-programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) immune checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab is currently approved for the treatment of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC); approximately 25% of patients respond. We hypothesized that we could identify a biomarker of response using radiomics to train a machine learning classifier to predict nivolumab response outcomes. METHODS: Patients with mRCC of different histologies treated with nivolumab in a single institution between 2013 and 2017 were retrospectively identified. Patients were labelled as responders (complete response [CR]/partial response [PR]/durable stable disease [SD]) or non-responders based on investigator tumor assessment using RECIST 1.1 criteria. For each patient, lesions were contoured from pre-treatment and first post-treatment computed tomography (CT) scans. This information was used to train a radial basis function support vector machine classifier to learn a prediction rule to distinguish responders from non-responders. The classifier was internally validated by a 10-fold nested cross-validation. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients were identified; 27 (73%) met the inclusion criteria. One hundred and four lesions were contoured from these 27 patients. The median patient age was 56 years, 78% were male, 89% had clear-cell histology, 89% had prior nephrectomy, and 89% had prior systemic therapy. There were 19 responders vs. eight non-responders. The lesions selected were lymph nodes (60%), lung metastases (23%), and renal/adrenal metastases (17%). For the classifier trained on the baseline CT scans, 69% accuracy was achieved. For the classifier trained on the first post-treatment CT scans, 66% accuracy was achieved. CONCLUSIONS: The set of radiomic signatures was found to have limited ability to discriminate nivolumab responders from non-responders. The use of novel texture features (two-point correlation measure, two-point cluster measure, and minimum spanning tree measure) did not improve performance.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".