ArticleBioinformatics advances2026
Leveraging uncertainty estimates for drug response prediction in cancer cell lines.
Article in Bioinformatics advances, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Motivation: Machine learning models for drug response prediction in cancer cell lines could advance precision oncology by tailoring treatments to the molecular tumor profile. Their application is challenged by variability in prediction quality and distribution shifts between training and application. Yet, the most effective uncertainty estimator is domain-specific. We benchmark uncertainty-aware models for drug response prediction. We focus on epistemic uncertainty via ensemble agreement, and aleatoric uncertainty via distributional modeling, or both. Results: We find that ensemble-based estimates are more sensitive to distribution shift and can flag out-of-distribution examples. In contrast, distributional models yield stronger prediction error reductions among high-confidence subsets. The combination can provide both advantages: an ensemble of neural networks that estimate a Gaussian predictive distribution can reduce the mean squared error by 64% when restricting predictions to the 10% most confident drug-cell line pairs, and reliably indicates distribution shifts and platform differences. We show that uncertainty estimates enable a new dimension of model interpretability: by attributing predicted uncertainty to input features, we identify genes that signal unpredictability of drug response rather than sensitivity or resistance. We further demonstrate uncertainty-guided selection of measurements for active learning. Availability and implementation: The code is available at https://github.com/PascalIversen/LUDRP.
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.