Multi-institutional prognostic modeling of survival outcomes in NSCLC patients treated with first-line immunotherapy using radiomics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have emerged as one of the most promising first-line therapeutics in the management of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, only a subset of these patients responds to ICIs, highlighting the clinical need to develop better predictive and prognostic biomarkers. This study will leverage pre-treatment imaging profiles to develop survival risk models for NSCLC patients treated with first-line immunotherapy. METHODS: Advanced NSCLC patients (n = 149) were retrospectively identified from two institutions who were treated with first-line ICIs. Radiomics features extracted from pretreatment imaging scans were used to build the predictive models for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). A compendium of five feature selection methods and seven machine learning approaches were utilized to build the survival risk models. The concordance index (C-index) was used to evaluate model performance. RESULTS: From our results, we found several combinations of machine learning algorithms and feature selection methods to achieve similar performance. K-nearest neighbourhood (KNN) with ReliefF (RL) feature selection was the best-performing model to predict PFS (C-index = 0.61 and 0.604 in discovery and validation cohorts), while XGBoost with Mutual Information (MI) feature selection was the best-performing model for OS (C-index = 0.7 and 0.655 in discovery and validation cohorts). CONCLUSION: The results of this study highlight the importance of implementing an appropriate feature selection method coupled with a machine learning strategy to develop robust survival models. With further validation of these models on external cohorts when available, this can have the potential to improve clinical decisions by systematically analyzing routine medical images.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".