Better than RECIST and Faster than iRECIST: Defining the Immunotherapy Progression Decision Score to Better Manage Progressive Tumors on Immunotherapy

Author:

Belkouchi Younes12ORCID,Talbot Hugues1ORCID,Lassau Nathalie23ORCID,Lawrance Littisha2ORCID,Farhane Siham4ORCID,Feki-Mkaouar Rahma3ORCID,Hadchiti Joya3ORCID,Dawi Lama3ORCID,Vibert Julien4ORCID,Cournède Paul-Henry5ORCID,Cousteix Clara2ORCID,Mazza Camille4ORCID,Kind Michele6ORCID,Italiano Antoine6ORCID,Marabelle Aurelien4ORCID,Ammari Samy3ORCID,Champiat Stephane4ORCID

Affiliation:

1. 1Centre de vision numérique (CVN), CentraleSupélec, Université Paris-Saclay, Inria, Gif-Sur-Yvette, France.

2. 2Laboratoire d'Imagerie Biomédicale Multimodale Paris-Saclay (BIOMAPS), UMR 1281. Université Paris-Saclay, Inserm, CNRS, Villejuif, France.

3. 3Département d'Imagerie, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France.

4. 4Département d'Innovation Thérapeutique et d'Essais Précoces (DITEP), Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France.

5. 5Mathématiques et Informatique pour la Complexité et les Systèmes (MICS), CentraleSupélec, Université Paris-Saclay, Gif-Sur-Yvette, France.

6. 6Département d'Imagerie Médicale, Institut Bergonié, Bordeaux, France.

Abstract

AbstractPurpose:The objective of the study is to propose the immunotherapy progression decision (iPD) score, a practical tool based on patient features that are available at the first evaluation of immunotherapy treatment, to help oncologists decide whether to continue the treatment or switch rapidly to another therapeutic line when facing a progressive disease patient at the first evaluation.Experimental Design:This retrospective study included 107 patients with progressive disease at first evaluation according to RECIST 1.1. Clinical, radiological, and biological data at baseline and first evaluation were analyzed. An external validation set consisting of 31 patients with similar baseline characteristics was used for the validation of the score.Results:Variables were analyzed in a univariate study. The iPD score was constructed using only independent variables, each considered as a worsening factor for the survival of patients. The patients were stratified in three groups: good prognosis (GP), poor prognosis (PP), and critical prognosis (CP). Each group showed significantly different survivals (GP: 11.4, PP: 4.4, CP: 2.3 months median overall survival, P < 0.001, log-rank test). Moreover, the iPD score was able to detect the pseudoprogressors better than other scores. On the validation set, CP patients had significantly worse survival than PP and GP patients (P < 0.05, log-rank test).Conclusions:The iPD score provides oncologists with a new evaluation, computable at first progression, to decide whether treatment should be continued (for the GP group), or immediately changed for the PP and CP groups. Further validation on larger cohorts is needed to prove its efficacy in clinical practice.

Funder

Université Paris-Saclay

Publisher

American Association for Cancer Research (AACR)

Subject

Cancer Research,Oncology

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3