ArticleJournal for immunotherapy of cancer2026
CT-based deep foundation model for predicting immune checkpoint inhibitor-induced pneumonitis risk in lung cancer.
Article in Journal for immunotherapy of cancer, 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
- Update of
Authors and funding
26 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized cancer therapy, but can cause serious immune-related adverse events, with pneumonitis (ICI-P) being among the most severe. Early identification of high-risk patients before ICI initiation is critical for close monitoring, timely intervention, and optimizing outcomes. PURPOSE: To develop and validate a deep learning foundation model to predict ICI-P from baseline CT scans in patients with lung cancer.
methodsWe designed the Checkpoint-Inhibitor Pneumonitis Hazard EstimatoR (CIPHER), a deep learning-powered foundation model combining contrastive learning with a transformer-based masked autoencoder to predict ICI-P from baseline CT scans in patients with lung cancer. Using self-supervised learning, CIPHER was pretrained on 590,284 CT slices from 2,500 patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) to learn representations of heterogeneous lung parenchyma. Following pretraining, CIPHER was adapted to the internal MD Anderson Cancer Center NSCLC immunotherapy cohort of 347 patients, of whom 33 developed adjudicated ICI-P. Fine-tuning was performed using 254 non-ICI-P patients only, and a held-out internal validation set of 93 patients, including 33 ICI-P cases and 60 non-ICI-P controls, was reserved for evaluation. CIPHER was benchmarked against clinical, radiomics, and ensemble comparator models and externally validated in an independent Johns Hopkins NSCLC cohort of 116 patients, including 20 ICI-P cases and 96 non-ICI-P controls.
resultsIn our internal immunotherapy cohort, CIPHER consistently distinguished patients at elevated risk of ICI-P from those without the event, with area under the curves (AUCs) ranging from 0.77 to 0.85. In head-to-head benchmarking, CIPHER achieved an AUC of 0.83, outperforming the clinical, radiomics and ensemble models. In the external validation cohort, CIPHER maintained high performance (AUC=0.83; balanced accuracy=81.7%), exceeding the radiomics model (DeLong p=0.0318) and demonstrating superior specificity without sacrificing sensitivity. By contrast, the radiomics model, despite high sensitivity (85.0%), showed markedly lower specificity (45.8%). Confusion matrix analyses confirmed CIPHER's robust classification, correctly identifying 80 of 96 non-ICI-P cases and 16 of 20 ICI-P cases.
conclusionsWe developed and externally validated CIPHER, a CT-based imaging biomarker for pretreatment ICI-P risk stratification in NSCLC. CIPHER shows promise as a non-invasive tool for ICI-P risk assessment but warrants prospective validation before clinical translation.
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.