ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2025
Empirical Evaluation of Single-Cell Foundation Models for Predicting Cancer Outcomes.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Foundation models pretrained on large-scale single-cell RNA sequencing data present a promising opportunity to advance translational cancer research. However, their utility in clinically relevant, patient-level applications of single-cell analysis remains underexplored. Here, we systematically evaluated nine emerging single-cell foundation models (scFMs) and three alternative baseline approaches across six cancer-specific tasks, ranging from subtype classification to treatment response prediction. We assessed model performance under zero-shot, continual training, and fine-tuning conditions, conducting 1,170 supervised and 130 unsupervised experiments. Our findings revealed that while current scFMs excel in certain analysis tasks, such as tumor microenvironment cell annotation, they had limited advantages in predicting clinical and biological outcomes of cancer patients compared to simpler baseline models. These insights highlight the critical role of evaluation on biologically and clinically relevant tasks in the responsible and impactful application of scFMs in precision oncology. They also emphasize the necessity of further methodological innovation and expanded cancer single-cell cohorts for the future development of scFMs.
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.