ReviewCancer cell international2025
AI-based neoadjuvant immunotherapy response prediction across pan-cancer: a comprehensive review.
Review in Cancer cell international, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Machine learning-based models for tumor mutation burden prediction in gastrointestinal cancers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Discover oncology · 2026Review
- Engineering Immune Cell to Counteract Aging and Aging-Associated Diseases.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Causal AI for cancer immunotherapy: a narrative framework review of target trial emulation, treatment-effect learning and clinical translation.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Explainable deep learning approaches and clinical insights for cancer biomarker identification.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- AI based prediction of chemotherapy response in cancer patients: A cross-sectional study.Bioinformation · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Neoadjuvant immunotherapy (NIT) has emerged as a transformative treatment strategy across various cancer types. However, due to the significant heterogeneity of tumors, patients exhibit highly variable responses to NIT, making the accurate preoperative identification of those who would benefit a pressing clinical challenge. In recent years, artificial intelligence (AI), particularly machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL), has opened new pathways for predicting treatment response. AI-driven approaches have the ability to extract latent features from high-dimensional, multimodal oncological data, facilitating the construction of efficient predictive models that can optimize individualized treatment strategies. In this review, we systematically summarize existing AI-driven computational approaches for NIT response prediction, categorizing them into indirect and direct predictive paradigms. The indirect paradigm predicts clinically validated surrogate biomarkers to infer therapeutic response to NIT. In contrast, the direct paradigm leverages AI to analyze high-throughput data and establish data-driven biomarkers that directly predict clinical endpoints of NIT. Additionally, we categorize existing AI predictive models based on data modalities, spanning radiomics, pathomics, genomics, and multi-omics approaches, each providing distinct insights into tumor characteristics and treatment response. Despite notable progress, current predictive models still face significant challenges, which we broadly classify into biomarker-based and AI-based limitations. We further discuss potential strategies to address these challenges. This review systematically summarizes recent AI-based predictive models for NIT response across cancer types. By offering a structured analysis of current methodologies and challenges, we aim to guide future research and accelerate the integration of AI into precision immunotherapy.
Indexed as
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.