Machine Learning for Prediction of Immunotherapy Efficacy in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer from Simple Clinical and Biological Data
Authors:
- Sébastien BenzekrySBSébastien Benzekry
- Mathieu GrangeonMGMathieu Grangeon
- Mélanie KarlsenMKMélanie Karlsen
- Maria AlexaMAMaria Alexa
- Isabella Bicalho-FrazetoIBIsabella Bicalho-Frazeto
- Solène ChaleatSCSolène Chaleat
- Pascale TomasiniPTPascale Tomasini
- Dominique BarbolosiDBDominique Barbolosi
- Fabrice BarlesiFBFabrice Barlesi
- Laurent GreillierLGLaurent Greillier
Open Access
Abstract
Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are now a therapeutic standard in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but strong predictive markers for ICIs efficacy are still lacking. We evaluated machine learning models built on simple clinical and biological data to individually predict response to ICIs. Methods: Patients with metastatic NSCLC who received ICI in second line or later were included. We collected clinical and hematological data and studied the association of this data with disease control rate (DCR), progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Multiple machine learning (ML) algorithms were assessed for their ability to predict response. Results: Overall, 298 patients were enrolled. The overall response rate and DCR were 15.3% and 53%, respectively. Median PFS and OS were 3.3 and 11.4 months, respectively. In multivariable analysis, DCR was significantly associated with performance status (PS) and hemoglobin level (OR 0.58, p < 0.0001; OR 1.8, p < 0.001). These variables were also associated with PFS and OS and ranked top in random forest-based feature importance. Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio was also associated with DCR, PFS and OS. The best ML algorithm was a random forest. It could predict DCR with satisfactory efficacy based on these three variables. Ten-fold cross-validated performances were: accuracy 0.68 ± 0.04, sensitivity 0.58 ± 0.08; specificity 0.78 ± 0.06; positive predictive value 0.70 ± 0.08; negative predictive value 0.68 ± 0.06; AUC 0.74 ± 0.03. Conclusion: Combination of simple clinical and biological data could accurately predict disease control rate at the individual level.Keywords
All Related Versions
This publication has 48 references indexed in Scilit:
- Mathematical Modeling of Cancer Immunotherapy and Its Synergy with RadiotherapyCancer Research, 2016
- Pembrolizumab versus docetaxel for previously treated, PD-L1-positive, advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (KEYNOTE-010): a randomised controlled trialThe Lancet, 2016
- Baseline neutrophils and derived neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio: prognostic relevance in metastatic melanoma patients receiving ipilimumabAnnals of Oncology, 2016
- Prognostic value of platelet to lymphocyte ratio in non-small cell lung cancer: evidence from 3,430 patientsScientific Reports, 2016
- Signatures of mutational processes in human cancerNature, 2013
- Mutational heterogeneity in cancer and the search for new cancer-associated genesNature, 2013
- The prognostic influence of tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes in cancer: a systematic review with meta-analysisBritish Journal of Cancer, 2011
- New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: Revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1)European Journal of Cancer, 2009
- Statistical Modeling: The Two Cultures (with comments and a rejoinder by the author)Statistical Science, 2001
- Inflammation and cancer: back to Virchow?The Lancet, 2001