ArticleArXiv2024
Histopathology Based AI Model Predicts Anti-Angiogenic Therapy Response in Renal Cancer Clinical Trial.
Article in ArXiv, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Predictive biomarkers of treatment response are lacking for metastatic clearcell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC), a tumor type that is treated with angiogenesis inhibitors, immune checkpoint inhibitors, mTOR inhibitors and a HIF2 inhibitor. The Angioscore, an RNA-based quantification of angiogenesis, is arguably the best candidate to predict anti-angiogenic (AA) response. However, the clinical adoption of transcriptomic assays faces several challenges including standardization, time delay, and high cost. Further, ccRCC tumors are highly heterogenous, and sampling multiple areas for sequencing is impractical. Approach: Here we present a novel deep learning (DL) approach to predict the Angioscore from ubiquitous histopathology slides. In order to overcome the lack of interpretability, one of the biggest limitations of typical DL models, our model produces a visual vascular network which is the basis of the model's prediction. To test its reliability, we applied this model to multiple cohorts including a clinical trial dataset. Results: Our model accurately predicts the RNA-based Angioscore on multiple independent cohorts (spearman correlations of 0.77 and 0.73). Further, the predictions help unravel meaningful biology such as association of angiogenesis with grade, stage, and driver mutation status. Finally, we find our model is able to predict response to AA therapy, in both a real-world cohort and the IMmotion150 clinical trial. The predictive power of our model vastly exceeds that of CD31, a marker of vasculature, and nearly rivals the performance (c-index 0.66 vs 0.67) of the ground truth RNA-based Angioscore at a fraction of the cost. Conclusion: By providing a robust yet interpretable prediction of the Angioscore from histopathology slides alone, our approach offers insights into angiogenesis biology and AA treatment response.
Identifiers
38855551PMC11160863What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.