Abstract
Radiotherapy has been striving to find markers of radiotherapy sensitivity for decades. In recent years the community has spent significant resources on exploring the wide range of omics data-sets to find that elusive perfect biomarker. One such candidate termed the “Radiosensitivity Index”, “RSI” for short, has been heavily publicized as a marker suitable for making dose-adjustments in the clinical setting. However, none of the analyses conducted, thus far, has assessed whether “RSI” explains enough of the outcome variance to elucidate a dose-response empirically. Here we re-analyze a pan-cancer data-set and find that “RSI” is no better than random chance at explaining outcome variance, overall survival times. For completeness, we then assessed whether “RSI” captured a sufficient amount of outcome variance to elucidate a dose-response, it did not. These results suggest that like the initial in-vitro analysis 12 years previously “RSI” is not a marker of radiotherapy sensitivity and is thus not fit to be used in any dose-adjustment algorithms.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
No funding was received.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This was a retrospective analysis of open-access data thus the analysis is exempt from needing IRB approaval.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
0
Blogs/Media
Author Videos