Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38539231›Full record

ReviewGenome medicine2024

Deep learning in cancer genomics and histopathology.

Michaela Unger, Jakob Nikolas Kather

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Genome medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 59 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
59citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

59 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

2 authors.

Michaela UngerElse Kroener Fresenius Center for Digital Health, Medical Faculty Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany. michaela.unger@tu-dresden.de.ORCID 0000-0001-5811-0200
Jakob Nikolas KatherElse Kroener Fresenius Center for Digital Health, Medical Faculty Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany. jakob_nikolas.kather@tu-dresden.de.

Funding

European Research Council 101114631
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Histopathology and genomic profiling are cornerstones of precision oncology and are routinely obtained for patients with cancer. Traditionally, histopathology slides are manually reviewed by highly trained pathologists. Genomic data, on the other hand, is evaluated by engineered computational pipelines. In both applications, the advent of modern artificial intelligence methods, specifically machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL), have opened up a fundamentally new way of extracting actionable insights from raw data, which could augment and potentially replace some aspects of traditional evaluation workflows. In this review, we summarize current and emerging applications of DL in histopathology and genomics, including basic diagnostic as well as advanced prognostic tasks. Based on a growing body of evidence, we suggest that DL could be the groundwork for a new kind of workflow in oncology and cancer research. However, we also point out that DL models can have biases and other flaws that users in healthcare and research need to know about, and we propose ways to address them.

Indexed as

Deep LearningNeoplasmsArtificial IntelligenceGenomicsHumansPrecision MedicineDeep learningGenomicsHistopathologyMultimodalityPrecision oncology

Identifiers

PMID38539231
PMCPMC10976780

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.