The DOI matches its Crossref record; 72 of the 72 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Machine learning applications in cancer prognosis and prediction
Open accessAbstract
Cancer has been characterized as a heterogeneous disease consisting of many different subtypes. The early diagnosis and prognosis of a cancer type have become a necessity in cancer research, as it can facilitate the subsequent clinical management of patients. The importance of classifying cancer patients into high or low risk groups has led many research teams, from the biomedical and the bioinformatics field, to study the application of machine learning (ML) methods. Therefore, these techniques have been utilized as an aim to model the progression and treatment of cancerous conditions. In addition, the ability of ML tools to detect key features from complex datasets reveals their importance. A variety of these techniques, including Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs), Bayesian Networks (BNs), Support Vector Machines (SVMs) and Decision Trees (DTs) have been widely applied in cancer research for the development of predictive models, resulting in effective and accurate decision making. Even though it is evident that the use of ML methods can improve our understanding of cancer progression, an appropriate level of validation is needed in order for these methods to be considered in the everyday clinical practice. In this work, we present a review of recent ML approaches employed in the modeling of cancer progression. The predictive models discussed here are based on various supervised ML techniques as well as on different input features and data samples. Given the growing trend on the application of ML methods in cancer research, we present here the most recent publications that employ these techniques as an aim to model cancer risk or patient outcomes.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
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?
In the citing paper
“traditional ML models, such as support vector machines (SVM), decision trees, and random forests, have supported tumor classification, survival prediction, and risk stratification using structured clinical or genomic data [6,12,13,14].”
From Artificial Intelligence in Clinical Oncology: From Productivity Enhancement to Creative Discovery (2025) · cites this paper as [13]
In the citing paper
“A second well-known challenge is that modern machine learning models, including deep neural networks, are black boxes, devices which focus on predicting outputs from inputs without regard for the mechanism or rationale by which a particular outcome is brought about.”
From Visible Machine Learning for Biomedicine (2018) · cites this paper as Kourou et al., 2014
In the citing paper
“Similarly, in biomedicine, many machine-learning methods are being developed to predict patient outcomes (Kourou et al., 2014), but these approaches typically do not link predictions to underlying mechanisms (Figure 1B).”
From Visible Machine Learning for Biomedicine (2018) · cites this paper as Kourou et al., 2014
In the citing paper
“Machine-learning systems face two recognized challenges that become particularly acute in biomedical applications. The first is input heterogeneity.”
From Visible Machine Learning for Biomedicine (2018) · cites this paper as Kourou et al., 2014
In the citing paper
“For example, cancer can arise as the result of many different combinations of genetic alterations involving many potential genes, any one of which may be mutated only rarely; as a consequence, each new patient presents a distinct constellation of molecular changes never before seen in nature (Alvarez et al., 2016; Kourou et al., 2014).”
From Visible Machine Learning for Biomedicine (2018) · cites this paper as Kourou et al., 2014
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Hallmarks of Cancer: The Next Generation
Hanahan, D., & Weinberg, R. A. (2011) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2011.02.013 · Cited by 66,590
Data Mining: Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques
Witten, I. H., Frank, E., & Hall, M. A. (2011) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/c2009-0-19715-5 · Cited by 25,537
Book Review: Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning
Nasrabadi, N. M. (2007) · Journal of Electronic Imaging · doi:10.1117/1.2819119 · Cited by 22,066
Wrappers for feature subset selection
Kohavi, R., & John, G. H. (1997) · Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/s0004-3702(97)00043-x · Cited by 9,096
Chiu, S., & Tavella, D. (2008) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780080878096-12 · Cited by 6,987
A Multigene Assay to Predict Recurrence of Tamoxifen-Treated, Node-Negative Breast Cancer
Paik, S., Shak, S., Tang, G., Kim, C., Baker, J. B., Cronin, M. T., Baehner, F. L., Walker, M. G., Watson, D., Park, T., et al. (2004) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa041588 · Cited by 6,321
Supervised Risk Predictor of Breast Cancer Based on Intrinsic Subtypes
Parker, J. S., Mullins, M., Cheang, M. C. U., Leung, S. C. Y., Voduc, D. K., Vickery, T. L., Davies, S. R., Fauron, C. M. ‐., He, X., Hu, Z., et al. (2009) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2008.18.1370 · Cited by 4,818
Large Margin DAG's for Multiclass Classification
Platt, J. C., Cristianini, N., & Shawe-Taylor, J. S. (1999) · Cited by 1,637
NCBI GEO: mining tens of millions of expression profiles--database and tools update
Barrett, T., Troup, D. B., Wilhite, S. E., Ledoux, P., Rudnev, D., Evangelista, C., Kim, I. F., Soboleva, A., Tomashevsky, M., & Edgar, R. (2006) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gkl887 · Cited by 1,524
Applications of Machine Learning in Cancer Prediction and Prognosis
Cruz, J. A., & Wishart, D. S. (2006) · Cancer Informatics · doi:10.1177/117693510600200030 · Cited by 1,371
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- Bishop C.M.: Pattern recognition and machine learning. New York: Springer 2006.
- Mitchell T.M.: The discipline of machine learning: Carnegie Mellon University. : Carnegie Mellon University, School of Computer Science, Machine Learning Department 2006.
- Platt J.C., Cristianini N. and Shawe-Taylor J.: Large margin DAGs for multiclass classification. : 1999: 547.
- Adams S.: Is Coursera the beginning of the end for traditional higher education?. : Higher Education 2012.
- Howlader N., Noone A., Krapcho M., Garshell J., Neyman N. and Aletkruse S.: SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975–2010, [Online] National Cancer Institute. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute 2013. [Online].
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Deep Learning: Methods and Applications
Deng, L., & Yu, D. (2014) · Foundations and Trends® in Signal Processing · doi:10.1561/2000000039 · Cited by 3,480
Explaining Deep Neural Networks and Beyond: A Review of Methods and Applications
Samek, W., Montavon, G., Lapuschkin, S., Anders, C. J., & Muller, K.-R. (2021) · Proceedings of the IEEE · doi:10.1109/jproc.2021.3060483 · Cited by 1,477
“In a medical scenario, the function may receive as input an array of clinical variables, and the output of the function may represent the evidence for a certain medical condition [96].”
BackgroundShi, F., Wang, J., Shi, J., Wu, Z., Wang, Q., Tang, Z., He, K., Shi, Y., & Shen, D. (2021) · IEEE Reviews in Biomedical Engineering · doi:10.1109/rbme.2020.2987975 · Cited by 1,404
The ethics of AI in health care: A mapping review
Morley, J., Machado, C. C. V., Burr, C., Cowls, J., Joshi, I., Taddeo, M., & Floridi, L. (2020) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113172 · Cited by 1,105
Predicting cancer outcomes from histology and genomics using convolutional networks
Mobadersany, P., Yousefi, S., Amgad, M., Gutman, D. A., Barnholtz-Sloan, J. S., Velázquez Vega, J. E., Brat, D. J., & Cooper, L. A. D. (2018) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1717139115 · Cited by 1,084
Metadata
- Authors
- Kourou, K., Exarchos, T. P., Exarchos, K. P., Karamouzis, M. V., & Fotiadis, D. I.
- Affiliations
- University of Ioannina (GR)
- National and Kapodistrian University of Athens (GR)
- Corresponding author
- Fotiadis, Dimitrios I.
- Venue
- Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
- Published
- 2014-11-15
- Volume
- 13
- Pages
- 8-17
- ISSN
- 2001-0370 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC4348437
- OpenAlex
- W2111547563
- Cited by
- 3,338
- References
- 72
- Citations by year
- 2026: 302 · 2025: 406 · 2024: 401 · 2023: 405 · 2022: 393 · 2021: 433 · 2020: 425 · 2019: 274 · 2018: 158 · 2017: 80 · 2016: 49 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 4.98
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- funded by the project NEOMARK (FP7-ICT 224483)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in cancer detection
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene expression and cancer classification
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
- Keywords
- cancer prognosis, cancer risk prediction, prediction model, artificial neural networks, Bayesian networks, support vector machine, decision tree, supervised learning, clinical decision support, tumor heterogeneity
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
