ArticleFrontiers in immunology2026
Article in Frontiers in immunology, 2026. 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Cutaneous melanoma (CM) incidence is rising, and despite advances in immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), many metastatic patients do not respond or develop resistance. This study aimed to evaluate the prognostic value of a pre-treatment FDG-PET/CT-based radiomic model (MEL-RAD) for predicting 1-year progression-free survival (1y-PFS) in metastatic CM patients treated with first-line ICI. Methods: We retrospectively included 154 metastatic CM patients from two centers who underwent pre-treatment FDG-PET/CT before ICI initiation. Patients were split into a development cohort (n=95) and an independent testing cohort (n=59). Radiomic features were extracted and harmonized to reduce inter-cohort variability. A two-step feature selection identified three key wavelet-transformed texture features used to build the MEL-RAD predictive model. The model's performance was assessed by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values. Survival analyses (progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS)) were performed with Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier methods. Results: In the development cohort, MEL-RAD achieved an AUC of 0.74 (p<0.0001) for predicting 1y-PFS. Using a 55% probability threshold, sensitivity was 93.8%, specificity 31.9%, with positive and negative predictive values of 58.4% and 83.4%, respectively. Patients with MEL-RAD >55% had significantly worse PFS (HR = 2.73, p=0.0009) and OS (HR = 3.20, p=0.0003). These results were externally validated: in the testing cohort, MEL-RAD positivity remained significantly associated with poorer PFS (HR = 2.73, p=0.047), and showed non-significant for OS. Conclusion: The MEL-RAD radiomic model based on pre-treatment FDG-PET/CT offers a non-invasive biomarker to stratify metastatic CM patients treated with immunotherapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.