Cited by 544Computational Drug Discovery MethodsMachine Learning in HealthcareMachine Learning in Materials Science

Predicting drug response and synergy using a deep learning model of human cancer cells

Open access
Kuenzi, Brent M., Park, Jisoo, Fong, Samson H., Sanchez, Kyle S., Lee, John, Kreisberg, Jason F., Ma, Jianzhu, Ideker, Trey·2020·Cancer Cell

Abstract

Most drugs entering clinical trials fail, often related to an incomplete understanding of the mechanisms governing drug response. Machine learning techniques hold immense promise for better drug response predictions, but most have not reached clinical practice due to their lack of interpretability and their focus on monotherapies. We address these challenges by developing DrugCell, an interpretable deep learning model of human cancer cells trained on the responses of 1,235 tumor cell lines to 684 drugs. Tumor genotypes induce states in cellular subsystems that are integrated with drug structure to predict response to therapy and, simultaneously, learn biological mechanisms underlying the drug response. DrugCell predictions are accurate in cell lines and also stratify clinical outcomes. Analysis of DrugCell mechanisms leads directly to the design of synergistic drug combinations, which we validate systematically by combinatorial CRISPR, drug-drug screening in vitro, and patient-derived xenografts. DrugCell provides a blueprint for constructing interpretable models for predictive medicine.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ccell.2020.09.014

Cites

83 of 83 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • AI agents show significant potential in personalized treatment by leveraging patient-specific data to tailor individualized treatment plans that optimize therapeutic outcomes.

    “AI agents show significant potential in the realm of personalized treatment by leveraging a variety of patient-specific data, including genetic information, medical history, lifestyle factors, and treatment responses.77,88,89,90,91,92”

    From A foundational architecture for AI agents in healthcare (2025) · cites this paper as [91]

    The Discussion (page not specified) says DrugCell uses patients’ mutational status to generate treatment recommendations, and the Methods describe predicting treatment response from patient mutational profiles. This supports the genetic-information aspect of personalized treatment, but the paper does not establish that the model uses medical history or lifestyle factors to tailor plans, or that its recommendations optimize patient outcomes. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • DrugCell is an interpretable deep learning model of cancer cell proliferation trained on the response of tumor cell lines to a large panel of drugs, combining genotype and drug structure to predict drug response along with specific cellular subsystems mediating that response.

    “This thread was recently extended through the development of DrugCell, an interpretable deep learning model of cancer cell proliferation (Kuenzi et al., 2020). Here, the model was trained on the response of tumor cell lines to a large panel of drugs, combining genotype and drug structure to predict the drug response along with the specific cellular subsystems mediating that response.”

    From Mapping the multiscale structure of biological systems (2021) · cites this paper as Kuenzi et al., 2020

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kuenzi, B. M., Park, J., Fong, S. H., Sanchez, K. S., Lee, J., Kreisberg, J. F., Ma, J., & Ideker, T.
Affiliations
  • University of California San Diego (US)
  • Purdue University West Lafayette (US)
Corresponding author
Ideker, Trey
Venue
Cancer Cell
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-11
Volume
38
Issue
5
Pages
672-684.e6
ISSN
1535-6108 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3094540299
Cited by
544
References
83
Citations by year
2026: 100 · 2025: 105 · 2024: 113 · 2023: 107 · 2022: 61 · 2021: 55 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1
FWCI
27.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cancer Cell (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Machine Learning in Materials Science
Keywords
drug response prediction, drug synergy, combination therapy, cancer cell lines, explainable deep learning, tumor genotype, drug structure, drug repurposing, CRISPR screen, patient-derived xenografts, cancer therapy
MeSH terms
Deep Learning, Antineoplastic Agents, Drug Screening Assays, Antitumor, Drug Synergism, Genotype, Humans, Neoplasms, Databases, Factual, Computational Biology, Cell Line, Tumor, Patient-Specific Modeling

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review