Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35204479›Full record

ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Outcome Prediction at Patient Level Derived from Pre-Treatment 18F-FDG PET Due to Machine Learning in Metastatic Melanoma Treated with Anti-PD1 Treatment.

Anthime Flaus, Vincent Habouzit, Nicolas de Leiris, Jean-Philippe Vuillez, Marie-Thérèse Leccia, Mathilde Simonson, Jean-Luc Perrot, Florent Cachin, Nathalie Prevot

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Beyond target lesions: Prognostic value of longitudinal AI-derived whole-body [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026
    Article
  3. Dual-time-point [EJNMMI research · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Frontiers in immunology · 2026
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. The Role and Potential ofDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    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

9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Anthime FlausNuclear Medecine Department, Saint-Etienne University Hospital, University of Saint-Etienne, 42000 Saint-Etienne, France.
Vincent HabouzitNuclear Medecine Department, Saint-Etienne University Hospital, University of Saint-Etienne, 42000 Saint-Etienne, France.
Nicolas de LeirisNuclear Medicine Department, CHU Grenoble Alpes, University Grenoble Alpes, 38000 Grenoble, France.ORCID 0000-0002-0145-259X
Jean-Philippe VuillezNuclear Medicine Department, CHU Grenoble Alpes, University Grenoble Alpes, 38000 Grenoble, France.
Marie-Thérèse LecciaDermatology Department, CHU Grenoble Alpes, University Grenoble Alpes, 38000 Grenoble, France.
Mathilde SimonsonJean Perrin Cancer Centre of Clermont-Ferrand, Nuclear Medicine Department, 63011 Clermont-Ferrand, France.
Jean-Luc PerrotDermatology Department, Saint-Etienne University Hospital, University of Saint-Etienne, 42000 Saint-Etienne, France.ORCID 0000-0003-4479-9961
Florent CachinJean Perrin Cancer Centre of Clermont-Ferrand, Nuclear Medicine Department, 63011 Clermont-Ferrand, France.
Nathalie PrevotNuclear Medecine Department, Saint-Etienne University Hospital, University of Saint-Etienne, 42000 Saint-Etienne, France.ORCID 0000-0001-8442-2515
Inserm · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Saint-Étienne · FRCentre Jean Perrin · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Grenoble · FRUniversité Claude Bernard Lyon 1 · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

(1) Background: As outcome of patients with metastatic melanoma treated with anti-PD1 immunotherapy can vary in success, predictors are needed. We aimed to predict at the patients' levels, overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) after one year of immunotherapy, based on their pre-treatment 18F-FDG PET; (2) Methods: Fifty-six metastatic melanoma patients-without prior systemic treatment-were retrospectively included. Forty-five 18F-FDG PET-based radiomic features were computed and the top five features associated with the patient's outcome were selected. The analyzed machine learning classifiers were random forest (RF), neural network, naive Bayes, logistic regression and support vector machine. The receiver operating characteristic curve was used to compare model performances, which were validated by cross-validation; (3) Results: The RF model obtained the best performance after validation to predict OS and PFS and presented AUC, sensitivities and specificities (IC95%) of 0.87 ± 0.1, 0.79 ± 0.11 and 0.95 ± 0.06 for OS and 0.9 ± 0.07, 0.88 ± 0.09 and 0.91 ± 0.08 for PFS, respectively. (4) Conclusion: A RF classifier, based on pretreatment 18F-FDG PET radiomic features may be useful for predicting the survival status for melanoma patients, after one year of a first line systemic treatment by immunotherapy.

Indexed as

18F-FDG PETimmunotherapymachine-learningmelanomapredictionradiomics

Identifiers

PMID35204479
PMCPMC8870749
OpenAlexW4210411569

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.