Back

CT-Based Deep Foundation Model for Predicting Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor-Induced Pneumonitis Risk in Lung Cancer

Muneer, A.; Showkatian, E.; Kitsel, Y.; Saad, M. B.; Sujit, S. J.; Soto, F.; Shroff, G. S.; Faiz, S. A.; Ghanbar, M. I.; Ismail, S. M.; Vokes, N. I.; Cascone, T.; Le, X.; Zhang, J.; Byers, L. A.; Jaffray, D.; Chang, J. Y.; Liao, Z.; Naing, A.; Gibbons, D. L.; Vaporciyan, A. A.; Heymach, J. V.; Suresh, K. S.; Altan, M.; Sheshadri, A.; Wu, J.

2026-04-23 oncology
10.64898/2026.04.21.26351428 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized cancer therapy but can cause serious immune-related adverse events (irAEs), with pneumonitis (ICI-P) being among the most severe. Early identification of high-risk patients before ICI initiation is critical for closer monitoring, timely intervention, and improved outcomes. Purpose: To develop and validate a deep learning foundation model to predict ICI-P from baseline CT scans in patients with lung cancer. Methods: We designed the Checkpoint-Inhibitor Pneumonitis Hazard EstimatoR (CIPHER), a deep learning foundation model that combines contrastive learning with a transformer-based masked autoencoder to predict ICI-P from baseline CT scans in patients with lung cancer. Using self-supervised learning, CIPHER was pre-trained on 590,284 CT slices from 2,500 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients to capture heterogeneous lung parenchymal patterns. After pre-training, the model was fine-tuned on an internal NSCLC cohort for ICI-P risk prediction, using images from 254 patients for model development and 93 patients for internal validation. We compared CIPHER with classical radiomic models and further evaluated it on an external NSCLC cohort of 116 patients. Results: In the internal immunotherapy cohort, CIPHER consistently distinguished patients at elevated risk of ICI-P from those without the event, with AUCs ranging from 0.77 to 0.85. In head-to-head benchmarking, CIPHER achieved an AUC of 0.83, outperforming the radiomic models. In the external validation cohort, CIPHER maintained strong performance (AUC = 0.83; balanced accuracy = 81.7%), exceeding the radiomic models (DeLong p = 0.0318) and demonstrating higher specificity without sacrificing sensitivity. By contrast, the radiomic model showed high sensitivity (85.0%) but markedly lower specificity (45.8%). Confusion matrix analysis confirmed the robust classification performance of CIPHER, correctly identifying 80 of 96 non-ICI-P cases and 16 of 20 ICI-P cases. Conclusions: We developed and externally validated CIPHER for predicting future risk of ICI-P from pre-treatment CT scans. With prospective validation, CIPHER may be incorporated into routine patient management to improve outcomes.

Matching journals

The top 11 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Clinical Cancer Research
58 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
14.5%
2
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 26%
6.9%
3
JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute
16 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.4%
4
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 27%
4.4%
5
JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics
18 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.0%
6
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.0%
7
Cancer Cell
38 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
2.8%
8
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 46%
2.5%
9
Journal of Translational Medicine
46 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
2.1%
10
npj Precision Oncology
48 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.1%
11
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 13%
2.1%
50% of probability mass above
12
Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer
64 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.9%
13
Journal of Clinical Investigation
164 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.9%
14
Annals of Translational Medicine
17 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.8%
15
Annals of Oncology
13 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.7%
16
Frontiers in Immunology
586 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.7%
17
JNCI Cancer Spectrum
10 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
18
International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics
21 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.3%
19
European Journal of Cancer
10 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.3%
20
Frontiers in Oncology
95 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
21
Cancers
200 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.2%
22
EClinicalMedicine
21 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.1%
23
Molecular Cancer
14 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.1%
24
American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine
39 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.0%
25
Nature Machine Intelligence
61 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
26
Cancer Medicine
24 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
27
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
28
European Respiratory Journal
54 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
29
Thorax
32 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.8%
30
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 29%
0.8%