Gut microbiome and nutrition-related predictors of response to immunotherapy in cancer: making sense of the puzzle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The gut microbiome is emerging as an important predictor of response to immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy for patients with cancer. However, several nutrition-related patient characteristics, which are themselves associated with changes in gut microbiome, are also prognostic markers for ICI treatment response and survival. Thus, increased abundance of Akkermansia muciniphila, Phascolarctobacterium, Bifidobacterium and Rothia in stool are consistently associated with better response to ICI treatment. A. muciniphila is also more abundant in stool in patients with higher muscle mass, and muscle mass is a strong positive prognostic marker in cancer, including after ICI treatment. This review explores the complex inter-relations between the gut microbiome, diet and patient nutritional status and the correlations with response to ICI treatment. Different multivariate approaches, including archetypal analysis, are discussed to help identify the combinations of features which may select patients most likely to respond to ICI treatment.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".