Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34795006›Full record

ArticleJournal for immunotherapy of cancer2021

A Machine learning model trained on dual-energy CT radiomics significantly improves immunotherapy response prediction for patients with stage IV melanoma.

Andreas Stefan Brendlin, Felix Peisen, Haidara Almansour, Saif Afat, Thomas Eigentler, Teresa Amaral, Sebastian Faby, Adria Font Calvarons, Konstantin Nikolaou, Ahmed E Othman

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal for immunotherapy of cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. CT radiomics showed no improvement beyond volume dynamics for early lesion-level size response to immunotherapy in metastatic melanoma.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2026
    Observational
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Immunotherapy and Cancer: The Multi-Omics Perspective.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Andreas Stefan BrendlinDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Universitätsklinikum Tübingen, Tubingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5961-9727
Felix PeisenDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Universitätsklinikum Tübingen, Tubingen, Germany.
Haidara AlmansourDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Universitätsklinikum Tübingen, Tubingen, Germany.
Saif AfatDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Universitätsklinikum Tübingen, Tubingen, Germany.
Thomas EigentlerCenter of Dermatooncology, Department of Dermatology, Eberhard Karls Universitat Tubingen, Tubingen, Germany.
Teresa AmaralCenter of Dermatooncology, Department of Dermatology, Eberhard Karls Universitat Tubingen, Tubingen, Germany.
Sebastian FabyComputed Tomography, Siemens Healthcare GmbH, Erlangen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-0694-9375
Adria Font CalvaronsComputed Tomography, Siemens Healthcare GmbH, Erlangen, Germany.
Konstantin NikolaouDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Universitätsklinikum Tübingen, Tubingen, Germany.
Ahmed E OthmanDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Universitätsklinikum Tübingen, Tubingen, Germany ahmed.e.othman@googlemail.com.
Universitätsklinikum Tübingen · DESiemens Healthineers (Germany) · DECharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DEJohannes Gutenberg University Mainz · DEUniversity of Tübingen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo assess the additive value of dual-energy CT (DECT) over single-energy CT (SECT) to radiomics-based response prediction in patients with metastatic melanoma preceding immunotherapy. MATERIAL AND

methodsA total of 140 consecutive patients with melanoma (58 female, 63±16 years) for whom baseline DECT tumor load assessment revealed stage IV and who were subsequently treated with immunotherapy were included. Best response was determined using the clinical reports (81 responders: 27 complete response, 45 partial response, 9 stable disease). Individual lesion response was classified manually analogous to RECIST 1.1 through 1291 follow-up examinations on a total of 776 lesions (6.7±7.2 per patient). The patients were sorted chronologically into a study and a validation cohort (each n=70). The baseline DECT was examined using specialized tumor segmentation prototype software, and radiomic features were analyzed for response predictors. Significant features were selected using univariate statistics with Bonferroni correction and multiple logistic regression. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the best subset was computed (AUROC). For each combination (SECT/DECT and patient response/lesion response), an individual random forest classifier with 10-fold internal cross-validation was trained on the study cohort and tested on the validation cohort to confirm the predictive performance.

resultsWe performed manual RECIST 1.1 response analysis on a total of 6533 lesions. Multivariate statistics selected significant features for patient response in SECT (min. brightness, R²=0.112, padj. ≤0.001) and DECT (textural coarseness, R²=0.121, padj. ≤0.001), as well as lesion response in SECT (mean absolute voxel intensity deviation, R²=0.115, padj. ≤0.001) and DECT (iodine uptake metrics, R²≥0.12, padj. ≤0.001). Applying the machine learning models to the validation cohort confirmed the additive predictive power of DECT (patient response AUROC SECT=0.5, DECT=0.75; lesion response AUROC SECT=0.61, DECT=0.85; p<0.001).

conclusionThe new method of DECT-specific radiomic analysis provides a significant additive value over SECT radiomics approaches for response prediction in patients with metastatic melanoma preceding immunotherapy, especially on a lesion-based level. As mixed tumor response is not uncommon in metastatic melanoma, this lends a powerful tool for clinical decision-making and may potentially be an essential step toward individualized medicine.

Indexed as

AgedFemaleHumansMachine LearningMelanomaMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingRadiometryTomography, X-Ray Computedmelanoma

Identifiers

PMID34795006
PMCPMC8603266
OpenAlexW3214130426

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.