ReviewFrontiers in systems biology2026
Beyond static biomarkers: systems biology and AI for decoding cancer dynamics.
Review in Frontiers in systems biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Covariate-adjusted AP-1 motif architecture and footprinting track olaparib-adaptive chromatin remodelling.Frontiers in systems biology · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Precision oncology has been built largely on static biomarkers, including mutational profiles, receptor status, histopathologic classes, and single-time-point molecular signatures. These readouts have transformed diagnosis and treatment selection, but they remain mismatched to a disease whose most consequential behaviors-progression, metastasis, treatment adaptation, dormancy, and relapse-are dynamic, noisy, and multiscale. In this article, we argue that cancer is better understood as a stochastic, coupled biological system than as a fixed molecular identity. We bring together adjacent literatures spanning cancer cell states, spatial and ecological organization, metabolism and dormancy, mechanobiology, longitudinal biomarkers, quantitative oncology, and AI-enabled representation learning, and develop a mathematically grounded framework for reasoning about cancer dynamics. Our central claim is modest but consequential: future biomarkers should not only classify current disease state, but also estimate transition risk, system instability, and trajectory direction. To support that claim, we distinguish latent biological state from clinical observation, clarify why partial observability makes dynamic inference difficult, and introduce a mathematically explicit but deliberately constrained formal scaffold based on stochastic state-space models, local linearization, and layer-specific dynamical motifs. We then develop six internal biological layers of cancer dynamics-molecular regulatory dynamics, cellular state plasticity, spatial niche organization, tumor ecosystem co-evolution, metabolic-epigenetic coupling with dormancy, and mechanobiological feedback-and treat longitudinal clinical monitoring as a linked observation layer rather than a mechanistic subsystem. Particular attention is given to noise; transcriptional noise, ecological variability, treatment-induced perturbation, and measurement noise all shape how cancer states are occupied, destabilized, and detected. Finally, we review dynamic biomarker evidence from ctDNA-guided adjuvant therapy, circulating tumor cells, serial imaging, and adaptive therapy, discuss how AI can support inference under partial observability without replacing mechanism, examine regulatory and health-equity constraints, and outline the research agenda needed to turn dynamic oncology from a compelling idea into a reproducible clinical discipline.
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.