Kevin Robert Scibilia , Pirmin Schlicke , Folker Schneller , Christina Kuttler
{"title":"预测耐药性和假性进展:极简免疫编辑数学模型能否预测肺癌检查点抑制剂的治疗结果?","authors":"Kevin Robert Scibilia , Pirmin Schlicke , Folker Schneller , Christina Kuttler","doi":"10.1016/j.mbs.2024.109287","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background:</h3><p>The increased application of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) targeting PD-1/PD-L1 in lung cancer treatment generates clinical need to reliably predict individual patients’ treatment outcomes.</p></div><div><h3>Methods:</h3><p>To bridge the prediction gap, we examine four different mathematical models in the form of ordinary differential equations, including a novel delayed response model. We rigorously evaluate their individual and combined predictive capabilities with regard to the patients’ progressive disease (PD) status through equal weighting of model-derived outcome probabilities.</p></div><div><h3>Results:</h3><p>Fitting the complete treatment course, the novel delayed response model (<span><math><mrow><msup><mrow><mi>R</mi></mrow><mrow><mn>2</mn></mrow></msup><mo>=</mo><mn>0</mn><mo>.</mo><mn>938</mn></mrow></math></span>) outperformed the simplest model (<span><math><mrow><msup><mrow><mi>R</mi></mrow><mrow><mn>2</mn></mrow></msup><mo>=</mo><mn>0</mn><mo>.</mo><mn>865</mn></mrow></math></span>). The model combination was able to reliably predict patient PD outcome with an <strong>overall accuracy of 77%</strong> (sensitivity = 70%, specificity = 81%), solely through calibration with primary tumor longest diameter measurements. It autonomously identified a subset of 51% of patients where predictions with an <strong>overall accuracy of 81%</strong> (sensitivity = 81%, specificity = 81%) can be achieved. All models significantly outperformed a fully data-driven machine learning-based approach.</p></div><div><h3>Implications</h3><p>: These modeling approaches provide a dynamic baseline framework to support clinicians in treatment decisions by identifying different treatment outcome trajectories with already clinically available measurement data.</p></div><div><h3>Limitations and future directions:</h3><p>Conjoint application of the presented approach with other predictive tools and biomarkers, as well as further disease information (e.g. metastatic stage), could further enhance treatment outcome prediction. We believe the simple model formulations allow widespread adoption of the developed models to other cancer types. Similar models can easily be formulated for other treatment modalities.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0025556424001470/pdfft?md5=cc3264f4903a5bda0fe2d00c2529cd81&pid=1-s2.0-S0025556424001470-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Predicting resistance and pseudoprogression: are minimalistic immunoediting mathematical models capable of forecasting checkpoint inhibitor treatment outcomes in lung cancer?\",\"authors\":\"Kevin Robert Scibilia , Pirmin Schlicke , Folker Schneller , Christina Kuttler\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.mbs.2024.109287\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background:</h3><p>The increased application of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) targeting PD-1/PD-L1 in lung cancer treatment generates clinical need to reliably predict individual patients’ treatment outcomes.</p></div><div><h3>Methods:</h3><p>To bridge the prediction gap, we examine four different mathematical models in the form of ordinary differential equations, including a novel delayed response model. We rigorously evaluate their individual and combined predictive capabilities with regard to the patients’ progressive disease (PD) status through equal weighting of model-derived outcome probabilities.</p></div><div><h3>Results:</h3><p>Fitting the complete treatment course, the novel delayed response model (<span><math><mrow><msup><mrow><mi>R</mi></mrow><mrow><mn>2</mn></mrow></msup><mo>=</mo><mn>0</mn><mo>.</mo><mn>938</mn></mrow></math></span>) outperformed the simplest model (<span><math><mrow><msup><mrow><mi>R</mi></mrow><mrow><mn>2</mn></mrow></msup><mo>=</mo><mn>0</mn><mo>.</mo><mn>865</mn></mrow></math></span>). The model combination was able to reliably predict patient PD outcome with an <strong>overall accuracy of 77%</strong> (sensitivity = 70%, specificity = 81%), solely through calibration with primary tumor longest diameter measurements. It autonomously identified a subset of 51% of patients where predictions with an <strong>overall accuracy of 81%</strong> (sensitivity = 81%, specificity = 81%) can be achieved. All models significantly outperformed a fully data-driven machine learning-based approach.</p></div><div><h3>Implications</h3><p>: These modeling approaches provide a dynamic baseline framework to support clinicians in treatment decisions by identifying different treatment outcome trajectories with already clinically available measurement data.</p></div><div><h3>Limitations and future directions:</h3><p>Conjoint application of the presented approach with other predictive tools and biomarkers, as well as further disease information (e.g. metastatic stage), could further enhance treatment outcome prediction. We believe the simple model formulations allow widespread adoption of the developed models to other cancer types. Similar models can easily be formulated for other treatment modalities.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":1,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":16.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0025556424001470/pdfft?md5=cc3264f4903a5bda0fe2d00c2529cd81&pid=1-s2.0-S0025556424001470-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0025556424001470\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0025556424001470","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Predicting resistance and pseudoprogression: are minimalistic immunoediting mathematical models capable of forecasting checkpoint inhibitor treatment outcomes in lung cancer?
Background:
The increased application of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) targeting PD-1/PD-L1 in lung cancer treatment generates clinical need to reliably predict individual patients’ treatment outcomes.
Methods:
To bridge the prediction gap, we examine four different mathematical models in the form of ordinary differential equations, including a novel delayed response model. We rigorously evaluate their individual and combined predictive capabilities with regard to the patients’ progressive disease (PD) status through equal weighting of model-derived outcome probabilities.
Results:
Fitting the complete treatment course, the novel delayed response model () outperformed the simplest model (). The model combination was able to reliably predict patient PD outcome with an overall accuracy of 77% (sensitivity = 70%, specificity = 81%), solely through calibration with primary tumor longest diameter measurements. It autonomously identified a subset of 51% of patients where predictions with an overall accuracy of 81% (sensitivity = 81%, specificity = 81%) can be achieved. All models significantly outperformed a fully data-driven machine learning-based approach.
Implications
: These modeling approaches provide a dynamic baseline framework to support clinicians in treatment decisions by identifying different treatment outcome trajectories with already clinically available measurement data.
Limitations and future directions:
Conjoint application of the presented approach with other predictive tools and biomarkers, as well as further disease information (e.g. metastatic stage), could further enhance treatment outcome prediction. We believe the simple model formulations allow widespread adoption of the developed models to other cancer types. Similar models can easily be formulated for other treatment modalities.
期刊介绍:
Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance.
Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.