Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

Machine learning models show moderate accuracy predicting neoadjuvant immunotherapy response in NSCLC

Machine learning models show moderate accuracy predicting neoadjuvant immunotherapy response in…
Photo by Growtika / Unsplash
Key Takeaway
Interpret machine learning predictions for neoadjuvant immunotherapy response in NSCLC with caution due to low methodological quality and high risk of bias.

This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated 44 machine learning models for predicting response to neoadjuvant immunotherapy in resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The primary outcomes were methodological quality, risk of bias, and diagnostic performance. The combined internal AUC was 0.786 (95% CI: 0.740-0.826), with sensitivity of 0.763 (95% CI: 0.56-0.89) and specificity of 0.908 (95% CI: 0.471-0.991). For major pathologic response (MPR) prediction, the AUC was 0.805; for pathologic complete response (PCR), it was 0.761. Support vector machine (SVM) models achieved an AUC of 0.841, non-radiomics models 0.869, and radiomics models 0.775. Combined external validation AUC was 0.760, with MPR external AUC at 0.754.

The authors noted several limitations: low methodological quality, high risk of bias, unreasonable sample sizes, improper handling of missing data, defects in validation procedures, and multiple deficiencies in radiomics reports. These issues reduce confidence in the models' clinical applicability. The findings suggest that while machine learning shows promise for predicting immunotherapy response, current models are not yet ready for routine practice due to methodological shortcomings and lack of robust external validation.

Study Details

Study typeMeta analysis
EvidenceLevel 1
PublishedJun 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
BACKGROUND: The response of resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) to neoadjuvant immunotherapy is heterogeneous. Machine learning can integrate multimodal data to construct predictive models, but the methodological quality, risk of bias and clinical applicability of such models have not been systematically evaluated. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to systematically evaluate the methodological quality, risk of bias, and diagnostic performance of machine learning models for predicting neoadjuvant immunotherapy response in resectable NSCLC. METHODS: As of August 22, 2025, 11 databases were retrieved. Two researchers independently extracted the data, and a third researcher resolved the data differences. The quality of the model, the development process and the quality of radiomics reports were evaluated respectively by probast + AI, IJMEDI checklist and RQS. Meta-analysis of the AUC, sensitivity and specificity of the model was conducted using R software, and subgroup analysis was performed according to predictors, algorithms and outcomes. RESULTS: Seventeen studies involving 44 models were included. Eighty-nine percent of models had relatively low quality and all had a high risk of bias - key flaws included unreasonable sample size, improper handling of missing data and defects in validation procedures - but the overall applicability was good. IJMEDI scores ranged 26.5-37 (4 high-quality, others medium); average RQS of 12 radiomics studies was 14.58 (22.22%-52.78%), with multiple deficiencies. Ten internal validation models showed that the combined internal AUC was 0.786 (95% CI: 0.740-0.826, I2 = 0%), there was no publication bias (Egger's test), and the sensitivity was 0.763 (95% CI: (0.56-0.89), with a specificity of 0.908 (95% CI: 0.471-0.991). The predicted AUCs of MPR and PCR were 0.805 and 0.761, respectively. SVM achieved the highest AUC (0.841), and the non-radiomics model (0.869) was superior to the radiomics model (0.775). The combined external validation AUC was 0.760, among which the AUC predicted by MPR was 0.754. CONCLUSION: ML models show potential for predicting neoadjuvant immunotherapy efficacy in resectable NSCLC, with SVM and non-radiomics models superior. However, low methodological quality and high bias risk require cautious interpretation. Future work should refine methodology, address radiomics gaps, and promote clinical translation.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.