Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39272947›Full record

ReviewCancers2024

Future AI Will Most Likely Predict Antibody-Drug Conjugate Response in Oncology: A Review and Expert Opinion.

Navid Sobhani, Alberto D'Angelo, Matteo Pittacolo, Giuseppina Mondani, Daniele Generali

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
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

5 authors.

Navid SobhaniDepartment of Cancer Biology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1381-0283
Alberto D'AngeloDepartment of Medicine, Northern General Hospital, Sheffield S5 7AT, UK.
Matteo PittacoloDepartment of Surgery, Oncology and Gastroenterology, University of Padova, 35122 Padova, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-3938-289X
Giuseppina MondaniRoyal Infirmary Hospital, Foresterhill Health Campus, Aberdeen AB25 2ZN, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8898-6200
Daniele GeneraliDepartment of Medicine, Surgery and Health Sciences, University of Trieste, 34100 Trieste, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-6002-1530

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The medical research field has been tremendously galvanized to improve the prediction of therapy efficacy by the revolution in artificial intelligence (AI). An earnest desire to find better ways to predict the effectiveness of therapy with the use of AI has propelled the evolution of new models in which it can become more applicable in clinical settings such as breast cancer detection. However, in some instances, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration was obliged to back some previously approved inaccurate models for AI-based prognostic models because they eventually produce inaccurate prognoses for specific patients who might be at risk of heart failure. In light of instances in which the medical research community has often evolved some unrealistic expectations regarding the advances in AI and its potential use for medical purposes, implementing standard procedures for AI-based cancer models is critical. Specifically, models would have to meet some general parameters for standardization, transparency of their logistic modules, and avoidance of algorithm biases. In this review, we summarize the current knowledge about AI-based prognostic methods and describe how they may be used in the future for predicting antibody-drug conjugate efficacy in cancer patients. We also summarize the findings of recent late-phase clinical trials using these conjugates for cancer therapy.

Indexed as

antibody-drug conjugatesartificial intelligenceclinical trialsprognostic

Identifiers

PMID39272947
PMCPMC11394064

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.