ArticleJournal of advanced research2024
An interpretable artificial intelligence framework for designing synthetic lethality-based anti-cancer combination therapies.
Article in Journal of advanced research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Explainable/interpretable artificial intelligence and knowledge graph neural network for synthetic lethality prediction: overview, challenges, and future directions.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2026Review
- Advancing AI for multi-omics and clinical data integration in basic and translational cancer research.Nature reviews. Cancer · 2026Review
- Computational pathology-based artificial intelligence platform for the identification of common oral potentially malignant disorders.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Informatics at the Frontier of Cancer Research.Cancer research · 2025Review
- Pathway-guided architectures for interpretable AI in biological research.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2025Review
- Artificial Intelligence-Driven Innovations in Pharmaceutical Development and Drug Delivery Systems.Current topics in medicinal chemistry · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSynthetic lethality (SL) provides an opportunity to leverage different genetic interactions when designing synergistic combination therapies. To further explore SL-based combination therapies for cancer treatment, it is important to identify and mechanistically characterize more SL interactions. Artificial intelligence (AI) methods have recently been proposed for SL prediction, but the results of these models are often not interpretable such that deriving the underlying mechanism can be challenging.
objectivesThis study aims to develop an interpretable AI framework for SL prediction and subsequently utilize it to design SL-based synergistic combination therapies.
methodsWe propose a knowledge and data dual-driven AI framework for SL prediction (KDDSL). Specifically, we use gene knowledge related to the SL mechanism to guide the construction of the model and develop a method to identify the most relevant gene knowledge for the predicted results.
resultsExperimental and literature-based validation confirmed a good balance between predictive and interpretable ability when using KDDSL. Moreover, we demonstrated that KDDSL could help to discover promising drug combinations and clarify associated biological processes, such as the combination of MDM2 and CDK9 inhibitors, which exhibited significant anti-cancer effects in vitro and in vivo.
conclusionThese data underscore the potential of KDDSL to guide SL-based combination therapy design. There is a need for biomedicine-focused AI strategies to combine rational biological knowledge with developed models.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.