Pathak, Tilak

8534 Background: Immunotherapy (IO) has transformed treatment for non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but not all patients (pts) benefit, underscoring the need for predictive biomarkers to guide IO versus chemotherapy (Ch). CheckMate 227 (CM227; NCT02477826) showed a survival benefit of first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab (nivo+ipi) over Ch in stage IV NSCLC. CD8⁺ T cells are key mediators of antitumor immunity and are associated with IO benefit. We developed an artificial intelligence (AI)–based pipeline (VIGOR-CD8) that predicts spatial CD8⁺ immune signatures from routine baseline H&E whole-slide images using histopathology foundation model embeddings (H-Optimus-0) and virtual gene expression modeling (HE2Gene), and evaluated its ability to identify pts who do and do not derive IO benefit over Ch in CM227. Methods: 1,598 pts with advanced NSCLC were analyzed, including multi-institutional retrospective cohorts (n = 487; 65 for patch-level CD8⁺ prediction and overall survival (OS), 422 for patient-level OS) and a blinded CM227 validation subset (n = 1,111). For orthogonal validation, 86,470 H&E patches were co-registered with quantitative CD8⁺ immunofluorescence. H-Optimus-0 and HE2Gene immune-related embeddings were used to train a random forest classifier to predict patch-level CD8⁺ probability. Patch-level probabilities were aggregated into a patient-level CD8⁺ signature and dichotomized into biomarker-positive (B⁺) and biomarker-negative (B⁻) groups by the training-set median. Cox models assessed the impact of VIGOR-CD8 on OS. In CM227, prognostic and predictive utility were evaluated using treatment-specific analyses; investigators were blinded to outcomes, and models were trained on independent, non-overlapping cohorts. Results: VIGOR-CD8 was associated with longer OS in the testing cohort (n = 422; HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.53–0.87, p = 0.00163) and CM227 (n = 1,111; HR 0.8, 95% CI 0.67–0.96, p = 0.016), irrespective of treatment type and PD-L1 expression. Among pts with evaluable PD-L1, B⁺ pts treated with nivo+ipi had superior OS versus Ch (n = 617; HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.58–0.90, p = 0.003), while in B⁻ pts there was no significant OS difference between treatment arms (n = 130; HR 1.18, 95% CI 0.79–1.75, p = 0.436), supporting a predictive rather than purely prognostic role for VIGOR-CD8. Conclusions: An AI-derived CD8⁺ immune signature from routine baseline H&E slides was associated with favorable OS in CM227 and predicted differential benefit from nivo+ipi versus Ch. VIGOR-CD8 may help identify advanced NSCLC pts most likely to benefit from first-line dual IO, but further validation in independent and prospective trials is warranted.

3118 Background: Improved risk stratification is critically needed across multiple cancers to guide treatment decisions. This includes reducing overtreatment in Ductal Carcinoma in Situ (DCIS), addressing late recurrence risk in estrogen receptor-positive/lymph node-negative (ER+/LN-) breast cancer (BC), and refining prognosis in head & neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCC), and high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma (HGSOC). Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) reflect anti-tumor immunity, whereas tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs) polarize toward anti-tumor M1-like (CD68+) or immunosuppressive M2-like (CD163+) phenotypes. Integrating TILs with TAM polarization markers may better capture inflammatory balance and improve outcome prediction. We developed a hematoxylin and eosin (H&E)-only AI method (VAIP) to quantify TILs and virtual CD68/CD163 TAMs to develop multi-cancer based potential prognostic models. Methods: TILs were detected on H&E with HoVer-UNet, and virtual CD68 and CD163 macrophages were inferred with VISTA. In cancer regions, we computed cell densities and immune-balance ratios and trained cancer-specific Cox models with compact feature sets (DCIS 6; HGSOC 7; ER+ 4; HNSCC 4). Prognostic stratification used disease-free survival (DFS) for DCIS (N=273), HGSOC (training N=165, independent test N=220), and ER+ BC (training N=144, test N=622), and overall survival (OS) for HNSCC (N=77), reflecting clinical endpoints. Evaluation used cross-validation for cohorts without an external test set (DCIS, HNSCC) and independent training and testing when independent cohort was available (HGSOC, ER+). Results: Risk stratification performance across cancer types is in Table 1. The DCIS model used 6 features, largely TIL-macrophage contrast ratios (TIL/M2, TIL/M1). HGSOC used 7 features with a similar ratio-heavy immune-balance signature, plus macrophage-normalized density and polarization metrics (e.g., M1/N, M/N). In contrast, ER+ BC and HNSCC achieved best performance with 4 features dominated by macrophage measures, particularly M2 density and the M1/M2 ratio. Across sites, CD163-related macrophage metrics and immune-balance ratios were consistently informative. Conclusions: Integrating H&E-visible TILs with virtual CD68/CD163 TAMs enables fully automated, H&E-only prognostic biomarkers that stratify OS and DFS across multiple cancers, demonstrating consistent prognostic value in DCIS, ER+ BC, HGSOC, and HNSCC. These findings support further study of this histomorphometric risk classifier through broader external and prospective validation. Performance across cancer types. Cancer Type Cohort C-index HR [95% CI] p-value DCIS All 0.616 1.76 [1.20-2.59] <0.001 DCIS RT/No-treatment 0.624 1.94 [1.15-3.26] 0.003 HGSOC Test 0.553 1.38 [1.02-1.87] 0.030 ER+ BC Test 0.577 1.51 [1.00-2.28] 0.004 HNSCC All 0.603 1.92 [1.03-3.36] 0.012