MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Friendly-user score assessing gut dysbiosis and resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI).

2023· article· en· W4379285657 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lisa Derosa, Carolina Alves Costa Silva, Valerio Iebba, Bertrand Routy, Anna Reni, Clarisse Audigier-Valette, Gérard Zalcman, Julien Mazières, S. Friard, François Goldwasser, Denis Lucien MORO SIBILOT, Arnaud Scherpereel, Hervé Pegliasco, Stéphanie Martinez, Bernard Escudier, David Planchard, Laurence Albigès, Benjamin Besse, Fabrice Barlési, Laurence Zitvogel

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGut microbiota and health
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAkkermansia muciniphilaMedicineInternal medicineDysbiosisOncologyGut floraCancerGastroenterologyImmunologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

103 Background: Accumulating evidence pointed to the impact of the intestinal microbiota on ICI outcomes across various cancers. Although specific gut microbial species have been associated with beneficial responses ( i.e. Akkermansia muciniphila (Akk)), no consensus exists on a gut fingerprint predicting immunoresistance to clinical routine use. Methods: NCT04567446 provided whole genome sequencing (WGS) of longitudinal fecal samples from patients (pts) with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) during ICI (alone or with chemotherapy) in France and Canada. Topological Pearson networks clustered into species interacting groups (SIG) correlating with overall survival (OS; OS<12=NR; OS>12=R). Forty harmful (SIG1) and thirty-four beneficial (SIG2) WGS species were associated with NR and R to ICI. A monodimensional score (TOPOSCORE) based on SIG1/SIG2 ratio combined with Akk relative abundance was calculated and compared to machine-learning (ML) algorithms. Multivariate Cox analysis (MVA) adjusted for established risk factors (ATB, gender, age, ECOG, PD-L1, LIPI score). Intraindividual dynamics of the TOPOSCORE was evaluated in pts with at least two fecal samples. Three independent cohorts of NSCLC and genitourinary (GU) cancers pts validated the data. Results: In n=245 and n=148 NSCLC pts, we could classify pts into dysbiotic (SIG1+,33%) and eubiotic (SIG2+, 67%), using the TOPOSCORE. Pts falling within the SIG2+ exhibited a significantly prolonged OS than pts falling into SIG1+ (HR: (95% CI), 0.50 (0.36-0.71), p<0.0001). TOPOSCORE also predicted OS in 277 ICI-treated NSCLC and GU pts and compared to the state-of-the-art ML algorithms, held the highest percentage of correct predictions (63%). At MVA, TOPOSCORE was independently associated with OS (HR: 0.56 (0.39-0.81), p=0.002). Analyzing the intraindividual dynamics of the TOPOSCORE (n=67), we found that 74% of SIG2+ and 68% of SIG1+ individuals remained in their initial classification during ICI treatment. We finally scaled the calculation of the TOPOSCORE down to 24WGS (instead 75WGS) and set up a qPCR-based friendly-user test capable of accurately identifying the fecal presence of the bacteria of interest within 48 hrs. We confirmed (n=323) that OS was superior in those pts harboring a 24-bacteria-qPCR-based TOPOSCORE falling within the SIG2+ category (HR: 0.65 (0.48 to 0.87), p=0.0005). Conclusions: TOPOSCORE represents a robust biomarker predicting and following the dynamic of the immunoresistance to ICI across cancers on an individual basis. By converting the WGS TOPOSCORE to a qPCR-based test with a rapid turnaround time, it will be possible to adopt this score in routine clinical practice to improve pts stratification and ICI success rates guiding the selection of dysbiotic pts amenable to microbiota-centered interventions and eubiotic fecal microbiota transplantation donors. Clinical trial information: NCT04567446 .

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.095

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.072
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.367 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicGut microbiota and health→French-language works237,207→