Back

Forecasting patient-specific tumor response using patient-reported outcomes in non-small cell lung cancer

Upadhyaya, D. J.; Schabath, M. B.; Hoogland, A. I.; Brady-Nicholls, R.

2026-01-29 oncology
10.64898/2026.01.29.26345069 medRxiv
Show abstract

PurposePatient-reported outcomes (PROs) provide a quantitative measure of a patients quality of life, directly from the patient without external influence or interpretation. Prior studies have demonstrated correlations between individual PROs and cancer treatment response. However, this area of research is still highly understudied, and patient data often goes ignored. Our previous work has shown how changes in insomnia can be used to make binary decisions about a patients future volume response. Here, we expand upon that work to determine precisely when treatment progression will occur, providing an opportunity for clinicians to intervene sooner. Experimental DesignThis study analyzed PROs and tumor volume data collected from 80 NSCLC patients undergoing immunotherapy to determine how PRO dynamics could inform when volumetric treatment progression would occur. We calibrated the tumor growth inhibition (TGI) model to patient-specific tumor volume dynamics for all volume measurements using a leave-one-out cross-validation approach. Growth parameters were divided based on progression status and sampled depending on changes in patient-reported insomnia. A cutoff analysis was performed to determine the optimal cutoff for distinguishing between responders and non-responders. Predictions were made for the Nth patient and categorized using the cutoff. ResultsThis study demonstrated that incorporating patient-specific changes in insomnia with a mathematical model of volume changes can predict patient response with a 72.2% true positive rate and 71.3% overall accuracy, on average 6-8 weeks sooner. ConclusionUsing this innovative framework, we can predict precisely when progression occurs, giving clinicians the opportunity to intervene beforehand.

Matching journals

The top 10 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 9%
8.5%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 22%
8.5%
3
Computers in Biology and Medicine
120 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
6.9%
4
Biology Methods and Protocols
53 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.4%
5
Journal of Translational Medicine
46 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.0%
6
Frontiers in Oncology
95 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.6%
7
BMC Bioinformatics
383 papers in training set
Top 3%
3.6%
8
BMC Cancer
52 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
3.6%
9
JMIR Formative Research
32 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.6%
10
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 4%
3.6%
50% of probability mass above
11
Sleep
26 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.9%
12
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 4%
2.6%
13
International Journal of Medical Informatics
25 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
2.1%
14
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.9%
15
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.9%
16
Artificial Intelligence in Medicine
15 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.7%
17
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
18
British Journal of Cancer
42 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.5%
19
Frontiers in Bioinformatics
45 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.5%
20
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 18%
1.5%
21
Cancers
200 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.5%
22
Frontiers in Pharmacology
100 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
23
Heliyon
146 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.2%
24
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 11%
1.0%
25
JMIR Medical Informatics
17 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
26
FEBS Open Bio
29 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.0%
27
Clinical Cancer Research
58 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
28
Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica
10 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.8%
29
BMC Infectious Diseases
118 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
30
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.8%