ArticleCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2025
Mechanistically Explainable AI Model for Predicting Synergistic Cancer Therapy Combinations.
Article in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The 5% Problem: How the Biomedical Community Responded to the Animal-to-Human Translation Crisis, and the Case for Non-Animal Methods.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Review
- Next-Generation Artificial Intelligence Strategies for Mechanistic Cancer Target Discovery and Drug Development: A State-of-the-Art Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study introduces a Large Language Model (LLM)-based framework that combines drug combination data with a knowledge graph to predict synergistic oncology drug combinations with mechanistic insights. Using a retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) approach, over 50,000 in vitro drug pair assay results and 1631 human clinical trial and preclinical test entries were integrated to enhance predictive accuracy and explainability. Validation achieved an F1 score of 0.80, demonstrating the framework's potential to streamline drug discovery and improve translational strategies in cancer treatment.
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.