Skip to main content
. 2023 Aug 17;14:1219209. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1219209

Figure 8.

Figure 8

The predictive efficacy of CSS model in immunotherapy. (A–D) The differences in the expression of immune checkpoint between high and low CSS score groups in the training set. (E–H) The differences of response index between high and low CSS score groups among four subgroups. (I) The differences in the Tumor Immune Dysfunction and Exclusion (TIDE) score between high and low CSS score groups in the training set. (J) The differences in CSS scores between groups with response and non-response to immunotherapy in the training set. (K) The proportion of patients who response to immunotherapy in high or low CSS score groups. (L) Survival analysis between high and low CSS score groups by Kaplan–Meier curves in the IMVigor-210 cohort. (M) The differences in CSS scores among four different immunotherapy responses in the IMvigor 210 cohort. (N) The differences in CSS scores among two combination immunotherapy responses in the IMvigor 210 cohort. (O) The proportion of three immune phenotypes in high or low CSS score groups. (P) The differences in CSS score among immune-excluded phenotype, immune-inflamed phenotype and immune-desert phenotype.