| Literature DB >> 35401554 |
Lan He1,2, Yanqi Huang1,2,3, Xin Chen4, Xiaomei Huang1,2, Huihui Wang1,2, Yuan Zhang1,2, Changhong Liang1,2, Zhenhui Li1,2,5, Lixu Yan6, Zaiyi Liu1,2.
Abstract
Background: Despite the well-known role of immunoscore, as a prognostic tool, that appeared to be superior to tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) staging system, no prognostic scoring system based on immunohistochemistry (IHC) staining digital image analysis has been established in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Hence, we aimed to develop and validate an immune-based prognostic risk score (IMPRS) that could markedly improve individualized prediction of postsurgical survival in patients with resected NSCLC.Entities:
Keywords: immune-based prognostic risk score; immunohistochemistry; non-small cell lung cancer; overall survival; prognostic prediction
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35401554 PMCID: PMC8983932 DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.835630
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Immunol ISSN: 1664-3224 Impact factor: 7.561
Figure 1The flow diagram for patient recruitment process.
Figure 2The workflow for the immunohistochemistry (IHC)-immune feature extraction.
Characteristics of patients in the discovery cohort and validation cohort.
| Characteristic | Discovery cohort (GDPH; n = 168) | Validation cohort (YCH; n = 115) |
|---|---|---|
|
| 61.0 (55.3, 67.8) | 55.0 (48.0, 64.0) |
|
| ||
| Male | 104 (61.9%) | 58 (50.4%) |
| Female | 64 (38.1%) | 57 (49.6%) |
|
| ||
| Yes | 53 (31.5%) | 38 (33.0%) |
| No | 115 (68.5%) | 77 (67.0%) |
|
| ||
| Adenocarcinoma | 123 (73.2%) | 104 (90.4%) |
| Others | 45 (26.8%) | 11 (9.6%) |
|
| ||
| T1 | 60 (35.7%) | 82 (71.3%) |
| T2 | 80 (47.6%) | 24 (20.9%) |
| T3 | 26 (15.5%) | 6 (5.2%) |
| T4 | 2 (1.2%) | 3 (2.6%) |
|
| ||
| N0 | 122 (72.6%) | 85 (73.9%) |
| N1 | 16 (9.5%) | 12 (10.4%) |
| N2 | 30 (17.9%) | 18 (15.7%) |
|
| ||
| IA+IB | 105 (62.5%) | 74 (64.3%) |
| IIA+IIB | 27 (16.1%) | 21 (17.2%) |
| IIIA | 36 (21.4%) | 20 (17.5%) |
|
| 18 (13, 25) | 12 (7, 16) |
|
| ||
| Pneumonectomy | 19 (11.3%) | 5 (4.3%) |
| Lobectomy/bilobectomy | 118 (70.2%) | 79 (68.7%) |
| Segmentomy | 22 (13.1%) | 24 (20.9%) |
| Wedge | 9 (5.4%) | 7 (6.1%) |
|
| ||
| Right upper lobe | 64 (38.1%) | 31 (27.0%) |
| Right middle lobe | 13 (7.7%) | 6 (5.2%) |
| Right lower lobe | 29 (17.3%) | 32 (27.8%) |
| Left upper lobe | 39 (23.2%) | 27 (23.5%) |
| Left lower lobe | 23 (13.7%) | 19 (16.5%) |
|
| 3.0 (1.8, 4.0) | 2.2 (1.5, 4.0) |
|
| ||
| Well differentiated | 9 (5.4%) | 3 (2.6%) |
| Moderately differentiated | 114 (67.9%) | 80 (69.6%) |
| Poorly differentiated | 45 (26.8%) | 32 (27.8%) |
|
| ||
| Yes | 45 (26.8%) | 62 (53.9%) |
| No | 109 (64.9%) | 53 (46.1%) |
| Unknown | 14 (8.3%) | NA |
|
| ||
| Median | 53.0 | 58.0 |
| IQR | (16.7, 72.7) | (36.0, 67.0) |
y, years; n, numbers; IQR, interquartile range; NA, not available; GDPH, Guangdong Provincial People’s Hospital; YCH, Yunnan Cancer Hospital.
Figure 3Time-dependent receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve and Kaplan–Meier survival curves. (A) Time-dependent ROC curve at 3 years in the discovery cohort. Patients were stratified into high- or low-risk group based on the cutoff value (cutoff=0.266). Kaplan–Meier survival curves for overall survival (OS) in the discovery (B) and validation cohort (C) according to the immunohistochemistry (IHC)-immune signature.
Univariate analyses for the potential prognostic predictors.
| Variable | Coefficient | HR (95%CI) |
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 1.336 | 3.805 (2.497, 5.798) | <0.001* |
|
| 0.834 | 2.303 (1.685, 3.146) | <0.001* |
|
| 0.031 | 1.031 (0.997, 1.067) | 0.071* |
|
| -0.661 | 0.517 (0.241, 1.108) | 0.090* |
|
| -0.452 | 0.636 (0.339, 1.193) | 0.159* |
|
| 0.538 | 1.713 (0.952, 3.082) | 0.073* |
|
| 0.012 | 1.012 (0.985, 1.041) | 0.388 |
|
| -0.345 | 0.709 (0.442, 1.135) | 0.152* |
|
| -0.093 | 0.911 (0.753, 1.102) | 0.336 |
|
| 0.115 | 1.122 (1.043, 1.206) | 0.002* |
|
| 0.784 | 2.190 (1.264, 3.792) | 0.005* |
|
| 2.908 | 18.313 (8.622, 38.894) | <0.001* |
HR, hazard ratio; IHC, immunohistochemistry; CI, confidence interval.
*A statistical relationship with OS (p < 0.30) was used as a criterion to retain factors that could have a potential significant impact on OS prediction.
Multivariate Cox proportional hazard analysis for prediction of OS among patients with resected NSCLC.
| Variable | Unadjusted stratified Cox model | IMPRS | clinicopathologic-based model | TNM staging system | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coefficient | HR (95%CI) |
| Coefficient | HR (95%CI) |
| Coefficient | HR (95%CI) |
| Coefficient | HR (95%CI) |
| |
|
| 0.960 | 2.611 (1.469, 4.641) | 0.001 | 1.023 | 2.781 (1.728, 4.478) | <0.001 | 1.180 | 3.254 (2.044, 5.180) | <0.001 | 1.181 | 3.259 (2.061, 5.153) | <0.001 |
|
| 0.580 | 1.787 (1.260, 2.535) | 0.001 | 0.567 | 1.763 (1.254, 2.477) | 0.001 | 0.606 | 1.832 (1.324, 2.535) | 0.0003 | 0.580 | 1.787 (1.292, 2.472) | 0.0005 |
|
| 0.054 | 1.056 (1.016, 1.097) | 0.005 | 0.040 | 1.041 (1.008, 1.075) | 0.015 | 0.040 | 1.041 (1.006, 1.077) | 0.023 | — | — | — |
|
| -0.857 | 0.452 (0.184, 0.978) | 0.044 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
|
| 0.246 | 1.279 (0.586, 2.792) | 0.537 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
|
| -0.581 | 0.559 (0.251, 1.246) | 0.155 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
|
| -0.055 | 0.947 (0.594, 1.510) | 0.818 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
|
| 0.092 | 1.096 (0.940, 1.277) | 0.241 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
|
| 0.543 | 1.721 (0.950, 3.116) | 0.073 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
|
| 2.366 | 10.653 (4.723, 24.028) | <0.001 | 2.211 | 9.121 (4.354, 19.108) | <0.001 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
IMPRS, immune-based prognostic risk score; HR, hazard ratio; IHC, immunohistochemistry; CI, confidence interval.
The score value of IMPRS was calculated as follow: Score = 1.023 × T stage + 0.567 × N stage + 0.040 × Age + 2.211 × IHC-immune signature. The score value of clnicopathological-based model was calculated as follow: Score = 1.180 × T stage + 0.606 × N stage + 0.040 × Age. The score value of TNM staging system was calculated as follows: Score = 1.181 × T stage + 0.580 × N stage.
Figure 4Visualization and calibration of the prognostic model. (A–C) The visualization of the prognostic model as a nomogram for patients with resected NSCLC (A for IMPRS, B for clinicopathologic-based model, C for TNM staging system). (D–F) The calibration curves for predicting overall survival (OS) at each time point (D for IMPRS, E for clinicopathologic-based model, F for TNM staging system).
Prediction performance of IHC-immune signature, IMPRS, and clinicopathological-based model in all patient cohort.
| Discovery cohort | Validation cohort | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C-index (95%CI) | AUC at 3 years (95%CI) | iAUC | iBS | C-index (95%CI) | AUC at 3 years (95%CI) | iAUC | iBS | |
|
| 0.824 (0.815–0.833) | 0.858 (0.779–0.938) | 0.818 | 0.138 | 0.708 (0.694–0.722) | 0.774 (0.688–0.861) | 0.617 | 0.150 |
|
| 0.786 (0.776–0.796) | 0.810 (0.731–0.888) | 0.778 | 0.122 | 0.646 (0.626–0.666) | 0.653 (0.523–0.783) | 0.651 | 0.145 |
|
| 0.814 (0.805–0.823) | 0.827 (0.754–0.900) | 0.792 | 0.117 | 0.674 (0.657–0.691) | 0.694 (0.576–0.812) | 0.663 | 0.142 |
|
| 0.869 (0.861–0.877) | 0.893 (0.826–0.961) | 0.869 | 0.093 | 0.731 (0.717–0.745) | 0.785 (0.694–0.877) | 0.701 | 0.132 |
IMPRS, immune-based prognostic risk score; IHC, immunohistochemistry; CI, confidence interval; iAUC, the integrated area under the ROC curve; iBS, the integrated Brier score.
Figure 5Time-dependent AUC and Brier score for overall survival (OS) in the discovery and validation cohort. (A) Time-dependent AUC for the discovery cohort; (B) time-dependent AUC for the validation cohort; (C) Brier score for the discovery cohort; (D) Brier score for the validation cohort.
Figure 6Decision curve analysis for the comparison of the IMPRS (red line), clinicopathological-based model (orange line), and TNM staging system (blue line) in term of clinical usefulness. The y-axis measures the net benefit.