Evidence Hub

Association of deep learning CT response assessment and interpretable components with overall survival in advanced NSCLC: Validation in a trial of sasanlimab and a real-world dataset

Chiharu Sako, T. Schmidt, Chong Duan, Kevin Maresca, A. Gowan, Shraddha Vyas, George R. Simon, R. Parikh et al.

Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2025

1,171 participants

Abstract

1559

Background:

Identifying advanced non–small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) patients who derive long-term benefit from immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) remains a significant challenge. Radiomic analyses, particularly leveraging deep learning, hold promise for improving prognostic accuracy beyond tumor size metrics. We developed serialCTRS, a novel biomarker using deep learning to quantify thoracic CT changes from baseline to 3 months post-treatment, predicting overall survival (OS) in patients receiving PD-(L)1 inhibitors.

Methods:

SerialCTRS was previously trained and validated on a multi-institutional Real-World Dataset (RWD) (training: 1,171 aNSCLC patients, 14,424 CT scans; validation: 612 patients; Sako et al. SITC, 2024). For this study, we retrospectively validated serialCTRS in two distinct cohorts of aNSCLC patients: (1) a clinical trial (N = 52) treated with the PD-1 inhibitor sasanlimab in the second or later line and (2) a fully blinded RWD from Baylor Scott & White Health system (N = 147), an institution not used for training. The pipeline—spanning image quality control, preprocessing, feature extraction, and survival modeling—operated without manual annotations. To enhance interpretability, we developed 3D submodels for prognostic signals related to (i) tumor burden, (ii) body composition, and (iii) lung vasculature. Predictive performance was compared to RECIST 1.1 using concordance index (c-index) and ROC-AUC for 24-month OS (OS24 AUC).

Results:

SerialCTRS…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 1,171 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free