Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42186096›Full record

ReviewCardio-oncology (London, England)2026

Predicting immune checkpoint inhibitor cardiotoxicity using machine learning: a systematic review of model performance and methodological quality.

Vaibhav Roy

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cardio-oncology (London, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Vaibhav RoySharda School of Medical Sciences and Research, Sharda University, Greater Noida, India. vaibhavkroy1212@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) significantly improve cancer outcomes but can cause rare, potentially fatal cardiotoxicity, including myocarditis and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Machine learning (ML) and artificial intelligence (AI) models have emerged as promising tools for early detection and risk prediction; however, their performance, methodological quality, and clinical applicability remain unclear.

objectiveTo systematically evaluate ML-based prediction models developed to identify cardiotoxicity, myocarditis, or cardiac adverse events in patients receiving ICIs, and assess their methodological robustness using PROBAST.

methodsA systematic search of PubMed (18-20 November 2025) was performed using a multi-stage strategy (broad → refined → high-specificity). Seven studies met eligibility criteria. Data extraction covered population, predictors, outcomes, model types, validation, and performance metrics. Risk of bias was assessed using PROBAST. Supplementary files include full search strategies, extraction sheets, PRISMA flow diagram, and PROBAST tables.

resultsSeven ML models were identified, including XGBoost, multimodal deep learning, neural networks, ECG-based AI models, pharmacovigilance-driven ML, and two clinical nomograms. Sample sizes ranged from 23 to 4,282 patients. Reported AUC values varied: XGBoost, 0.92; Fusion AI, 0.88; FAERS ML, 0.83; ECG AI, 0.91; Time-series NN, predictive ranking only; Nomogram, 0.83-0.967. Troponin, ECG features, neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio, NT-proBNP, and clinical factors such as steroid dose and radiotherapy emerged as consistent predictors. PROBAST identified high risk of bias in three models (mainly due to small datasets, inadequate validation, and unclear handling of missing data). Two studies using independent validation cohorts achieved low risk of bias.

conclusionML-based models show promising discriminative ability for predicting ICI-related cardiotoxicity and myocarditis; however, most studies suffer from methodological limitations that restrict real-world clinical adoption. Larger multicenter cohorts, standardized definitions, multimodal integration, and adherence to TRIPOD-AI reporting guidelines are needed to advance clinically deployable models.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceCardiotoxicityImmune checkpoint inhibitorsMachine learningMyocarditisPrediction modelsPROBASTSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID42186096
PMCPMC13411542

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.