Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39377504›Full record

ArticlePathologica2024

A preliminary study on the diagnostic performance of the uPath PD-L1 (SP263) artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm in patients with NSCLC treated with PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint blockade.

Alessio Cortellini, Claudia Zampacorta, Michele De Tursi, Lucia R Grillo, Serena Ricciardi, Emilio Bria, Maurizio Martini, Raffaele Giusti, Marco Filetti, Antonella Dal Mas and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pathologica, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
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

14 authors.

Alessio CortelliniOperative Research Unit of Medical Oncology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Roma, Italy.
Claudia ZampacortaCenter for Advanced Studies and Technology (CAST), University Chieti-Pescara, Italy.
Michele De TursiDepartment of Innovative Technologies in Medicine & Dentistry, University G. D'Annunzio, Chieti-Pescara, Italy.
Lucia R GrilloAnatomic Pathology Unit, San Camillo-Forlanini Hospitals, Rome, Italy.
Serena RicciardiMedical Oncology, San Camillo Forlanini Hospital, Roma, Italy.
Emilio BriaMedical Oncology, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Maurizio MartiniDepartment of Human Pathology in Adult and Developmental Age "Gaetano Barresi", Section of Pathology, University of Messina, Messina, Italy.
Raffaele GiustiMedical Oncology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Sant'Andrea, Rome, Italy.
Marco FilettiPhase 1 Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Antonella Dal MasPathology Unit, St. Salvatore Hospital, L'Aquila, Italy.
Marco RussanoOperative Research Unit of Medical Oncology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Roma, Italy.
Filippo Gustavo Dall'OlioDepartement de Medicine Oncologique, Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France.
Fiamma ButtittaCenter for Advanced Studies and Technology (CAST), University Chieti-Pescara, Italy.
Antonio MarchettiCenter for Advanced Studies and Technology (CAST), University Chieti-Pescara, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: The uPath PD-L1 (SP263) is an AI-based platform designed to aid pathologists in identifying and quantifying PD-L1 positive tumor cells in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) samples stained with the SP263 assay. Methods: In this preliminary study, we explored the diagnostic performance of the uPath PD-L1 algorithm in defining PD-L1 tumor proportion score (TPS) and predict clinical outcomes in a series of patients with advanced stage NSCLC treated with single agent PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint blockade previously assessed with the SP263 assay in clinical practice. Results: 44 patients treated from August 2015 to January 2019 were included, with baseline PD-L1 TPS of ≥ 50%, 1-49% and < 1% in 38.6%, 25.0% and 36.4%, respectively. The median uPath PD-L1 score was 6 with a significant correlation with the baseline PD-L1 TPS (r: 0.83, p < 0.01). However, only 27 cases (61.4%) were scored within the same clinically relevant range of expression (≥ vs < 50%). In the study population the baseline PD-L1 TPS was not significantly associated with clinical outcomes, while the uPath PD-L1 score showed a good diagnostic ability for the risk of death at the ROC curve analysis [AUC: 0.81 (95%CI: 0.66-0.91), optimal cut-off of ≥ 3.2], resulting in 19 patients (43.2%) being u-Path low and 25 patients (56.8%) being uPath high. The objective response rate in uPath high and low was 51.6% and 25.0% (p = 0.1), respectively, although the uPath was significantly associated with overall survival (OS, HR 2.45, 95%CI: 1.19-5.05) and progression free survival (PFS, HR 3.04, 95%CI: 1.51-6.14). At the inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis used to balance baseline covariates, the uPath categories confirmed to be independently associated with OS and PFS. Conclusions: This preliminary analysis suggests that AI-based, digital pathology tools such as uPath PD-L1 (SP263) can be used to optimize already available biomarkers for immune-oncology treatment in patients with NSCLC.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsArtificial IntelligenceB7-H1 AntigenCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungImmune Checkpoint InhibitorsLung NeoplasmsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBiomarkers, TumorFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProgrammed Cell Death 1 ReceptorB7-H1 AntigenBiomarkers, TumorCD274 protein, humanImmune Checkpoint InhibitorsPDCD1 protein, humanProgrammed Cell Death 1 Receptordigital pathologyImmune CheckpointimmunotherapyNSCLCPD-L1

Identifiers

PMID39377504
PMCPMC11460154

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.