Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36873878›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in medicine2023

Deep learning methods for drug response prediction in cancer: Predominant and emerging trends.

Alexander Partin, Thomas S Brettin, Yitan Zhu, Oleksandr Narykov, Austin Clyde, Jamie Overbeek, Rick L Stevens

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 73 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
73citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
24.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

73 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 122 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

13 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Alexander PartinDivision of Data Science and Learning, Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont, IL, United States.
Thomas S BrettinDivision of Data Science and Learning, Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont, IL, United States.
Yitan ZhuDivision of Data Science and Learning, Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont, IL, United States.
Oleksandr NarykovDivision of Data Science and Learning, Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont, IL, United States.
Austin ClydeDivision of Data Science and Learning, Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont, IL, United States.
Jamie OverbeekDivision of Data Science and Learning, Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont, IL, United States.
Rick L StevensDivision of Data Science and Learning, Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont, IL, United States.
Argonne National Laboratory · US

Funding

WORK ORDER 126643 B539 EXPAND IC SUITE75N91019D00024 · NIAID · LEIDOS BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH, INC. · PI PENDLETON, RICHARD · 2019 to 2025
$3932.6M
NCI NIH HHS 75N91019D00024
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cancer claims millions of lives yearly worldwide. While many therapies have been made available in recent years, by in large cancer remains unsolved. Exploiting computational predictive models to study and treat cancer holds great promise in improving drug development and personalized design of treatment plans, ultimately suppressing tumors, alleviating suffering, and prolonging lives of patients. A wave of recent papers demonstrates promising results in predicting cancer response to drug treatments while utilizing deep learning methods. These papers investigate diverse data representations, neural network architectures, learning methodologies, and evaluations schemes. However, deciphering promising predominant and emerging trends is difficult due to the variety of explored methods and lack of standardized framework for comparing drug response prediction models. To obtain a comprehensive landscape of deep learning methods, we conducted an extensive search and analysis of deep learning models that predict the response to single drug treatments. A total of 61 deep learning-based models have been curated, and summary plots were generated. Based on the analysis, observable patterns and prevalence of methods have been revealed. This review allows to better understand the current state of the field and identify major challenges and promising solution paths.

Indexed as

deep learningdrug response predictiondrug sensitivitymultiomicsneural networkspersonalized medicineprecision medicineprecision oncology

Identifiers

PMID36873878
PMCPMC9975164
OpenAlexW4320920782

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.