Radiomics using computed tomography to predict CD73 expression and prognosis of colorectal cancer liver metastases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Finding a noninvasive radiomic surrogate of tumor immune features could help identify patients more likely to respond to novel immune checkpoint inhibitors. Particularly, CD73 is an ectonucleotidase that catalyzes the breakdown of extracellular AMP into immunosuppressive adenosine, which can be blocked by therapeutic antibodies. High CD73 expression in colorectal cancer liver metastasis (CRLM) resected with curative intent is associated with early recurrence and shorter patient survival. The aim of this study was hence to evaluate whether machine learning analysis of preoperative liver CT-scan could estimate high vs low CD73 expression in CRLM and whether such radiomic score would have a prognostic significance. Methods We trained an Attentive Interpretable Tabular Learning (TabNet) model to predict, from preoperative CT images, stratified expression levels of CD73 (CD73 High vs. CD73 Low ) assessed by immunofluorescence (IF) on tissue microarrays. Radiomic features were extracted from 160 segmented CRLM of 122 patients with matched IF data, preprocessed and used to train the predictive model. We applied a five-fold cross-validation and validated the performance on a hold-out test set. Results TabNet provided areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.95 (95% CI 0.87 to 1.0) and 0.79 (0.65 to 0.92) on the training and hold-out test sets respectively, and outperformed other machine learning models. The TabNet-derived score, termed rad-CD73, was positively correlated with CD73 histological expression in matched CRLM (Spearman’s ρ = 0.6004; P < 0.0001). The median time to recurrence (TTR) and disease-specific survival (DSS) after CRLM resection in rad-CD73 High vs rad-CD73 Low patients was 13.0 vs 23.6 months ( P = 0.0098) and 53.4 vs 126.0 months ( P = 0.0222), respectively. The prognostic value of rad-CD73 was independent of the standard clinical risk score, for both TTR (HR = 2.11, 95% CI 1.30 to 3.45, P < 0.005) and DSS (HR = 1.88, 95% CI 1.11 to 3.18, P = 0.020). Conclusions Our findings reveal promising results for non-invasive CT-scan-based prediction of CD73 expression in CRLM and warrant further validation as to whether rad-CD73 could assist oncologists as a biomarker of prognosis and response to immunotherapies targeting the adenosine pathway.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".