Cited by 402Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical ImagingMachine Learning in HealthcareAI in cancer detection

Multimodal data fusion for cancer biomarker discovery with deep learning

Open access
Steyaert, Sandra, Pizurica, Marija, Nagaraj, Divya, Khandelwal, Priya, Hernandez-Boussard, Tina, Gentles, Andrew J., Gevaert, Olivier·2023·Nature Machine Intelligence

Abstract

Technological advances have made it possible to study a patient from multiple angles with high-dimensional, high-throughput multiscale biomedical data. In oncology, massive amounts of data are being generated, ranging from molecular, histopathology, radiology to clinical records. The introduction of deep learning has greatly advanced the analysis of biomedical data. However, most approaches focus on single data modalities, leading to slow progress in methods to integrate complementary data types. Development of effective multimodal fusion approaches is becoming increasingly important as a single modality might not be consistent and sufficient to capture the heterogeneity of complex diseases to tailor medical care and improve personalized medicine. Many initiatives now focus on integrating these disparate modalities to unravel the biological processes involved in multifactorial diseases such as cancer. However, many obstacles remain, including lack of usable data as well as methods for clinical validation and interpretation. Here, we cover these current challenges and reflect on opportunities through deep learning to tackle data sparsity and scarcity, multimodal interpretability and standardization of datasets. Cancer diagnosis and treatment decisions often focus on one data source. Steyaert and colleagues discuss the current status and challenges of data fusion, including electronic health records, molecular data, digital pathology and radiographic images, in cancer research and translational development.

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 · 10.1038/s42256-023-00633-5

Cites

161 of 161 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 systems can profit significantly from assimilating multimodal data into prediction and classification models to imitate integrative human clinical decision-making.

    “AI systems can profit significantly from assimilating multimodal data into prediction and classification models to imitate integrative human clinical decision-making.”

    From Orchestrating explainable artificial intelligence for multimodal and longitudinal data in medical imaging (2024) · cites this paper as [14]

    The Introduction (page not provided) says combining data modalities can make healthcare AI more sensitive and robust for diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment assignment. The section on multimodal data fusion in oncology also calls for integrating those data into clinical decision systems. The paper does not say that these models imitate human clinical decision-making, and its discussion is specifically about oncology rather than AI systems generally. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Assimilating multimodal data can boost AI systems' robustness and accuracy, enable discovery of new biomarkers and therapeutic targets, and improve model performance.

    “This can boost their robustness and accuracy, enable the discovery of new biomarkers and therapeutic targets6,14, as well as improve model performance15–17.”

    From Orchestrating explainable artificial intelligence for multimodal and longitudinal data in medical imaging (2024) · cites this paper as [14]

    The Introduction (page unavailable) says combining modalities can make diagnosis, prognosis and treatment assignment more robust and provide a resource for biomarker discovery. It does not establish discovery of new therapeutic targets. The model-performance clause is attached to separate citations (15–17), so it is not assessed against this source. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Understanding important gene features or cross-modality regulatory networks is essential to uncover the mechanism of disease development and identify new disease biomarkers and drug targets.

    “The understanding of important gene features or cross-modality regulatory networks is essential to uncover the mechanism of disease development and identify new disease biomarkers and drug targets [28].”

    From Challenges in AI-driven Biomedical Multimodal Data Fusion and Analysis (2025) · cites this paper as [28]

    The Introduction says that identifying complex genetic interactions can enhance understanding of tumour biology. The sections on multimodal biomarkers and future directions also discuss biomarker discovery and associations between modalities. But the paper frames these as potential avenues in oncology; it does not establish that understanding cross-modality regulatory networks is essential to explaining disease development or identifying new drug targets. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • High costs of biomedical data generation, difficulties in patient follow-up, and privacy restrictions limit size of training datasets and lead to missing data modalities.

    “The high costs of biomedical data generation, difficulties in patient follow-up, and privacy restrictions limit the size of training datasets and lead to missing data modalities [28].”

    From Challenges in AI-driven Biomedical Multimodal Data Fusion and Analysis (2025) · cites this paper as [28]

    In “Current challenges and future directions for multimodal data fusion” (page not available), the paper says cost can leave patients without some data modalities, while privacy concerns and annotation labour limit large matched, labelled cohorts. It also notes that cohorts often favour patients with continuous access to care, but does not identify difficulties in patient follow-up as a cause of small training datasets or missing modalities. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Data generated by diverse medical modalities is generally complementary, with each modality contributing unique information to the status of a patient.

    “The data generated by these diverse modalities is generally complementary, with each modality contributing unique information to the status of a patient.”

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

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. [67]Mikolov T, Sutskever I, Chen K, Corrado G & Dean J Distributed representations of words and phrases and their compositionality. Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems - Volume 2, 3111– 3119 (2013).
  2. [70]Devlin J, Chang M-W, Lee K & Toutanova K BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding. Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1, 4171– 4186 (2019).
  3. [140]Jie Y, Xutong L & Mingyue Z. Current status of active learning for drug discovery. Artificial Intelligence in the Life Sciences 1, 100023 (2021).
  4. [152]Lundberg SM & Lee SI. A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictions. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 30, 4765– 4774 (2017).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Steyaert, S., Pizurica, M., Nagaraj, D., Khandelwal, P., Hernandez-Boussard, T., Gentles, A. J., & Gevaert, O.
Affiliations
  • Stanford Medicine (US)
  • Stanford University (US)
Corresponding author
  • Steyaert, Sandra
  • Gevaert, Olivier
Venue
Nature Machine Intelligence
Published
2023-04-06
Volume
5
Issue
4
Pages
351-362
ISSN
2522-5839 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4362673398
Cited by
402
References
159
Citations by year
2026: 122 · 2025: 173 · 2024: 92 · 2023: 15
FWCI
66.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Machine Intelligence (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Cancer Institute (R01CA260271)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in cancer detection
Keywords
multimodal fusion, cancer biomarker discovery, deep learning, data sparsity, interpretability, electronic health records, digital pathology, radiographic images, molecular data, data standardization, personalized medicine, cancer diagnosis

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