Deep Learning Derived Histopathology Image Score for Increasing Phase 3 Clinical Trial Probability of Success

Failures in Phase 3 clinical trials contribute to expensive cost of drug development in oncology. To drastically reduce such cost, responders to an oncology treatment need to be identified early on in the drug development process with limited amount of patient data before the planning of Phase 3 clinical trials. Despite the challenge of small sample size, we pioneered the use of deep-learning derived digital pathology scores to identify responders based on the immunohistochemistry images of the target antigen expressed in tumor biopsy samples from a Phase 1 Non-small Cell Lung Cancer clinical trial. Based on repeated 10-fold cross validations, the deep-learning derived score on average achieved 4% higher AUC of ROC curve and 6% higher AUC of Precision-Recall curve comparing to the tumor proportion score (TPS) based clinical benchmark. In a small independent testing set of patients, we also demonstrated that the deep-learning derived score achieved numerically at least 25% higher responder rate in the enriched population than the TPS clinical benchmark.

[1]  R. Jain,et al.  Combining microenvironment normalization strategies to improve cancer immunotherapy , 2020, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[2]  L. Schwartz,et al.  New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). , 2009, European journal of cancer.

[3]  Max Welling,et al.  Attention-based Deep Multiple Instance Learning , 2018, ICML.

[4]  Ghassan Hamarneh,et al.  Predicting Cancer with a Recurrent Visual Attention Model for Histopathology Images , 2018, MICCAI.

[5]  Olivier Gevaert,et al.  Deep Recurrent Attention Models for Histopathological Image Analysis , 2018, bioRxiv.

[6]  V. Devanarayan,et al.  A PRIM approach to predictive-signature development for patient stratification , 2014, Statistics in medicine.

[7]  Marius Ilie,et al.  Assessment of the PD-L1 status by immunohistochemistry: challenges and perspectives for therapeutic strategies in lung cancer patients , 2016, Virchows Archiv.

[8]  Y. Shentu,et al.  Pembrolizumab versus Chemotherapy for PD-L1-Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer. , 2016, The New England journal of medicine.

[9]  Kenji Suzuki,et al.  Sensitive detection of viable circulating tumor cells using a novel conditionally telomerase-selective replicating adenovirus in non-small cell lung cancer patients , 2017, Oncotarget.

[10]  A. Hauschild,et al.  PD‐1 Blockade with Cemiplimab in Advanced Cutaneous Squamous‐Cell Carcinoma , 2018, The New England journal of medicine.

[11]  H. Grote,et al.  PD-L1 immunostaining scoring for non-small cell lung cancer based on immunosurveillance parameters , 2018, PloS one.

[12]  S. O'Reilly,et al.  Atezolizumab and Nab-Paclitaxel in Advanced Triple-Negative Breast Cancer. , 2019, The New England journal of medicine.

[13]  Qi Tang,et al.  Predicting Phase 3 Clinical Trial Results by Modeling Phase 2 Clinical Trial Subject Level Data Using Deep Learning , 2019, MLHC.

[14]  Li Fei-Fei,et al.  ImageNet: A large-scale hierarchical image database , 2009, CVPR.

[15]  D. Costa,et al.  Can PD-L1 tumor proportion score be used as the key to unlocking the KEYNOTE studies of pembrolizumab in advanced lung cancer? , 2019, Translational lung cancer research.

[16]  V. Devanarayan,et al.  Patient subgroup identification for clinical drug development , 2017, Statistics in medicine.

[17]  Bo Chen,et al.  MobileNets: Efficient Convolutional Neural Networks for Mobile Vision Applications , 2017, ArXiv.

[18]  N. Otsu A threshold selection method from gray level histograms , 1979 .

[19]  D. Brat,et al.  Predicting cancer outcomes from histology and genomics using convolutional networks , 2017, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[20]  Dmitrii Bychkov,et al.  Deep learning based tissue analysis predicts outcome in colorectal cancer , 2018, Scientific Reports.