The DOI matches its Crossref record; 192 of the 210 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 226 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions
Open accessAbstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) in oncology is advancing beyond algorithm development to integration into clinical practice. This review describes the current state of the field, with a specific focus on clinical integration. AI applications are structured according to cancer type and clinical domain, focusing on the four most common cancers and tasks of detection, diagnosis, and treatment. These applications encompass various data modalities, including imaging, genomics, and medical records. We conclude with a summary of existing challenges, evolving solutions, and potential future directions for the field. Significance: AI is increasingly being applied to all aspects of oncology, where several applications are maturing beyond research and development to direct clinical integration. This review summarizes the current state of the field through the lens of clinical translation along the clinical care continuum. Emerging areas are also highlighted, along with common challenges, evolving solutions, and potential future directions for the field.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
142 Not checked yet · 48 No basis given · 18 Own interpretation · 2 Own result
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“AI is increasingly being applied to all aspects of oncology, where several applications are maturing beyond research and development to direct clinical integration.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“FDA-cleared AI algorithms have also been developed to aid in the interpretation of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI; DEN1700, RRID:SCR_012945) and breast ultrasound exams (K190442, K210670, P150043 RRID:SCR_012945).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Breast Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites DEN1700
- Not checked yetcites K190442
- Not checked yetcites K210670
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the use of AI for breast cancer detection in X-ray mammography is one of the most active areas of development and clinical translation.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Breast Cancer
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“A subsequent study presented an AI approach that encompasses both 2D and 3D mammography, with evidence of detecting breast cancer 1 to 2 years earlier than standard radiographic review for some cases (10).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Breast Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [10] Lotter, 2021, Robust breast cancer detection in mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis using an annotation-efficient deep learning approach, Nat Med source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Several studies have also examined the use of AI to predict future breast cancer risk.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Breast Cancer
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“A later study led by Google in 2020 garnered much attention in reporting evidence of expertlevel breast cancer detection by an AI system (9).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Breast Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [9] McKinney, 2020, International evaluation of an AI system for breast cancer screening, Nature source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“AI is being heavily applied all along the cancer care continuum using different types of data (Fig. 2).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > INTRODUCTION
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“An early catalyst in this space was the Digital Mammography DREAM Challenge, an open AI competition where groups were able to benchmark and compare different AI approaches (8).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Breast Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [8] Schaffter, 2020, Evaluation of combined artificial intelligence and radiologist assessment to interpret screening mammograms, JAMA Netw Open source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Raciti and colleagues (60) reported on Paige Prostate Alpha, a commercial decision support system trained to detect prostate cancer from core-needle biopsies.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Prostate Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [60] Raciti, 2020, Novel artificial intelligence system increases the detection of prostate cancer in whole slide images of core needle biopsies, Mod Pathol source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In the context of colorectal cancer screening, deep learning has been applied extensively to colonoscopy images and video.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Colorectal Cancer
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“multiple randomized controlled trials have also reported promising results (16)(17)(18)(19)(20)(21)(22).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Colorectal Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [16] Wang, 2020, Effect of a deep-learning computer-aided detection system on adenoma detection during colonoscopy (CADe-DB trial): a double-blind randomised study, Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol source
- Not checked yetcites [17] Repici, 2020, Efficacy of real-time computer-aided detection of colorectal neoplasia in a randomized trial, Gastroenterology source
- Not checked yetcites [18] Karsenti, 2023, Effect of real-time computer-aided detection of colorectal adenoma in routine colonoscopy (COLO-GENIUS): a single-centre randomised controlled trial, Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Wang and colleagues (58) have developed DeepGrade, a deep learning model that aims to improve on the Nottingham grading system.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Breast Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [58] Wang, 2022, Improved breast cancer histological grading using deep learning, Ann Oncol source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“multiple groups have reported on Gleason scoring predictions from prostate cancer H&E images (62)(63)(64).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Prostate Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [62] Nagpal, 2019, Development and validation of a deep learning algorithm for improving Gleason scoring of prostate cancer, NPJ Digit Med source
- Not checked yetcites [63] Bulten, 2020, Automated deep-learning system for Gleason grading of prostate cancer using biopsies: a diagnostic study, Lancet Oncol source
- Not checked yetcites [64] Ström, 2020, Artificial intelligence for diagnosis and grading of prostate cancer in biopsies: a population-based, diagnostic study, Lancet Oncol source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“This evaluation includes comparison with a reference panel of pathologists working on the same data set with predefined time constraints designed to mimic routine pathology workflows, where many of the models in the challenge exhibited higher performance than the panel of pathologists.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Breast Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [45] Ehteshami Bejnordi, 2017, Diagnostic assessment of deep learning algorithms for detection of lymph node metastases in women with breast cancer, JAMA source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“AI is being used to guide biopsies themselves through prostate segmentation and quantitative feature extraction on MRI images (K193283, RRID:SCR_012945).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Prostate Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites K193283
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Hamm and colleagues (38) presented an explainable AI model that goes beyond classification to output AI predictions in terms of PI-RADS criteria (39)”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Prostate Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [38] Hamm, 2023, Interactive explainable deep learning model informs prostate cancer diagnosis at MRI, Radiology source
- Not checked yetcites [39] Turkbey, 2019, Prostate imaging reporting and data system Version 2.1: 2019 update of prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2, Eur Urol source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Challa and colleagues (47) evaluated the Visiopharm Integrator System metastasis AI algorithm in pathology workflows in a retrospective study at Ohio State University with promising results.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Breast Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [47] Challa, 2023, Artificial Intelligence-aided diagnosis of breast cancer lymph node metastasis on histologic slides in a digital workflow, Mod Pathol source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Zhou and colleagues (15) have reported on CRCNet, a deep learning model for detecting the presence of colorectal cancer within endoscopy images, with reported high performance across three independent data sets.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Colorectal Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [15] Zhou, 2020, Diagnostic evaluation of a deep learning model for optical diagnosis of colorectal cancer, Nat Commun source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“CEmarked products exist for quantifying estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), and Ki-67 status from digital pathology images (55-57).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Breast Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [55] Aiforia Clinical Suite.
- Not checked yetcites [56] Mindpeak Solutions
- Not checked yetcites [57] Panakeia Products
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“several studies have demonstrated the potential of using AI to facilitate intraoperative diagnosis (e.g., during surgical resection) using label-free (40,41) and cryosectioned (42,43) tissue samples.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > CANCER DIAGNOSIS
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [40] You, 2019, Real-time intraoperative diagnosis by deep neural network driven multiphoton virtual histology, NPJ Precis Oncol source
- Not checked yetcites [41] Hollon, 2020, Near real-time intraoperative brain tumor diagnosis using stimulated Raman histology and deep neural networks, Nat Med source
- Not checked yetcites [42] Nasrallah, 2023, Machine learning for cryosection pathology predicts the 2021 WHO classification of glioma, Med source
- Not checked yetcites [43] Ozyoruk, 2022, A deep-learning model for transforming the style of tissue images from cryosectioned to formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded, Nat Biomed Eng source
boostedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“including the National Lung Cancer Screening Trial (NLST), which has become a key public data resource for machine learning research.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Lung Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [27] National Lung Screening Trial Research Team, 2011, Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening, N Engl J Med source
- Not checked yetcites [28] Field, 2021, Lung cancer mortality reduction by LDCT screening: UKLS randomised trial results and international meta-analysis, Lancet Reg Health Eur source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Several of the clinical studies have reported an increased adenoma detection rate with AI, a central criterion in evaluating the effectiveness of colonoscopy procedures.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Colorectal Cancer
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Multiple academic groups and companies have developed AI models for prostate cancer diagnosis and grading from H&E images.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Prostate Cancer
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“These AI risk prediction algorithms have been shown to outperform traditional risk models (13,14)”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Breast Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [13] Arasu, 2023, Comparison of mammography AI algorithms with a clinical risk model for 5-year breast cancer risk prediction: an observational study, Radiology source
- Not checked yetcites [14] Eriksson, 2023, Long-term performance of an image-based short-term risk model for breast cancer, J Clin Oncol source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Multiple companies have received FDA clearance or EU certification for computer-aided detection (CADe) systems in identifying polyps from colonoscopy images (K211951, K223473 RRID:SCR_012945)”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Colorectal Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites K211951
- Not checked yetcites K223473
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Current U.S. and European guidelines recommend prostate cancer detection via MRI prior to biopsy (33,34).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Prostate Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [33] European Association of Urology. Guidelines on prostate cancer—diagnostic evaluation
- Not checked yetcites [34] American College of Radiology. Prostate MRI model policy
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“a commercial prototype from Siemens was shown to increase the diagnostic accuracy of clinically significant prostate cancer in a retrospective reader study involving seven radiologists (37).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Prostate Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [37] Winkel, 2021, A novel deep learning based computer-aided diagnosis system improves the accuracy and efficiency of radiologists in reading biparametric magnetic resonance images of the prostate: results of a multireader, multicase study, Invest Radiol source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Multiple groups have now leveraged NLST imaging data to develop lung cancer detection models.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Lung Cancer
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Multiple commercial platforms for breast cancer lymph node metastasis are also clinically available or in development.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Breast Cancer
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“However, most of these same studies also found an increased detection rate of diminutive adenomas (defined as polyps ≤5 mm in size), which are very rarely malignant (23,24).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Colorectal Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [23] Ahmad, 2020, Deep learning for colorectal polyp detection: time for clinical implementation?, Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol source
- Not checked yetcites [24] Misawa, 2023, Computer-aided detection in real-world colonoscopy: enhancing detection or offering false hope?, Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Nam and colleagues (31) have published promising results from a singlecenter, open-label randomized control trial that utilized an AI-based system for chest X-rays from the company Lunit, and reported that the AI arm had an improved detection rate of actionable nodules compared with the non-AI arm.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Lung Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [31] Nam, 2023, AI improves nodule detection on chest radiographs in a health screening population: a randomized controlled trial, Radiology source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“You and colleagues (40) have presented an approach that combines intraoperative microscopy with a deep learning model to classify malignant versus benign breast tissue.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Breast Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [40] You, 2019, Real-time intraoperative diagnosis by deep neural network driven multiphoton virtual histology, NPJ Precis Oncol source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“there are increasing efforts of using digital pathology images to guide treatment selection by predicting patient prognosis (73)(74)(75) and/or existing treatment biomarkers (76-79) using AI.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > CANCER TREATMENT
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [73] Mobadersany, 2018, Predicting cancer outcomes from histology and genomics using convolutional networks, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A source
- Not checked yetcites [74] Chen, 2021, Multimodal co-attention transformer for survival prediction in gigapixel whole slide images
- Not checked yetcites [75] Chen, 2022, Pan-cancer integrative histology-genomic analysis via multimodal deep learning, Cancer Cell source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“DoMore Diagnostics has a CE-marked product that predicts colorectal cancer prognosis from H&E slides (94).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Colorectal Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [94] DoMore Diagnostics: Histotype Px Colorectal
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The relatively poor prognosis of NSCLC and the variable success of immunotherapies for NSCLC have motivated many efforts in using AI to predict prognosis, treatment response, and existing biomarkers for these patients.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Lung Cancer
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Lu and colleagues (69) used a weakly supervised deep learning method-dubbed clustering-constrained-attention multiple-instance learning (CLAM)-to predict subtypes in renal cell carcinoma and NSCLC.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Lung and Colorectal Cancers
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [69] Lu, 2021, Data-efficient and weakly supervised computational pathology on whole-slide images, Nat Biomed Eng source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Vanguri and colleagues (108) demonstrated that a multimodal model that included CT images, digitized PD-L1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) slides, and molecular alteration data performed significantly better than unimodal models in predicting response to immunotherapy in NSCLC.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Lung Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [108] Vanguri, 2022, Multimodal integration of radiology, pathology and genomics for prediction of response to PD-(L)1 blockade in patients with non-small cell lung cancer, Nat Cancer source
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Along with directly predicting prognosis, there have been several studies using AI to predict previously identified prognostic/predictive biomarkers.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Colorectal Cancer
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“A recent study by Ogier du Terrail and colleagues (83) presented a federated learning approach for predicting response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in triple-negative breast cancer.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Breast Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [83] Ogier du Terrail, 2023, Federated learning for predicting histological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in triple-negative breast cancer, Nat Med source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“There are now several CE-marked products for Gleason grading (55,65,66).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Prostate Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [55] Aiforia Clinical Suite.
- Not checked yetcites [65] Ibex: Galen Prostate
- Not checked yetcites [66] Indica Labs: HALO Prostate AI.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Prognostic AI models for colorectal cancer have been developed for various data modalities, including MRI (88), histopathology (89-91), and multiplex imaging (92,93).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Colorectal Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [88] Jiang, 2023, An MRI deep learning model predicts outcome in rectal cancer, Radiology source
- Not checked yetcites [89] Wulczyn, 2021, Interpretable survival prediction for colorectal cancer using deep learning, NPJ Digit Med source
- Not checked yetcites [90] Kather, 2019, Predicting survival from colorectal cancer histology slides using deep learning: a retrospective multicenter study, PLOS Med source
- Not checked yetcites [91] Bychkov, 2018, Deep learning based tissue analysis predicts outcome in colorectal cancer, Sci Rep source
- Not checked yetcites [92] Wu, 2022, Graph deep learning for the characterization of tumour microenvironments from spatial protein profiles in tissue specimens, Nat Biomed Eng source
- Not checked yetcites [93] Foersch, 2023, Multistain deep learning for prediction of prognosis and therapy response in colorectal cancer, Nat Med source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Numerous studies have demonstrated the potential for using AI to predict immunotherapy biomarkers from H&E images of patients with NSCLC, including tumor mutation burden (TMB; ref. 76), PD-L1 expression (105), and TILs (106, 107).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Lung Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [76] Jain, 2020, Predicting tumour mutational burden from histopathological images using multiscale deep learning, Nat Mach Intell source
- Not checked yetcites [105] Sha, 2019, Multi-field-of-view deep learning model predicts non–small cell lung cancer programmed death-ligand 1 status from whole-slide hematoxylin and eosin images, J Pathol Inform source
- Not checked yetcites [106] Park, 2022, Artificial intelligence-powered spatial analysis of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes as complementary biomarker for immune checkpoint inhibition in non-small-cell lung cancer, J Clin Oncol source
- Not checked yetcites [107] Rakaee, 2023, Association of machine learning-based assessment of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes on standard histologic images with outcomes of immunotherapy in patients with NSCLC, JAMA Oncol source
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“This technology has been commercialized as the ArteraAI Prostate Test, which is now clinically available through a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA)-certified laboratory (115).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Prostate Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [115]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“a line of work (97-99) has focused on developing and validating AI for predicting microsatellite instability (MSI), a feature associated with clinical outcomes and a biomarker for immunotherapy (100).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Colorectal Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [97] Echle, 2022, Artificial intelligence for detection of microsatellite instability in colorectal cancer—a multicentric analysis of a pre-screening tool for clinical application, ESMO Open source
- Not checked yetcites [98] Echle, 2020, Clinical-grade detection of microsatellite instability in colorectal tumors by deep learning, Gastroenterology source
- Not checked yetcites [99] Kather, 2019, Deep learning can predict microsatellite instability directly from histology in gastrointestinal cancer, Nat Med source
- Not checked yetcites [100] Li, 2020, Microsatellite instability: a review of what the oncologist should know, Cancer Cell Int source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Other efforts have used AI on H&E images to directly predict TIL presence (85,86), a notable prognostic and predictive biomarker in breast cancer, and programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression status, a predictive biomarker for immunotherapies (87).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Breast Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [85] Saltz, 2018, Spatial organization and molecular correlation of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes using deep learning on pathology images, Cell Rep source
- Not checked yetcites [86] Binder, 2021, Morphological and molecular breast cancer profiling through explainable machine learning, Nat Mach Intell source
- Not checked yetcites [87] Shamai, 2022, Deep learning-based image analysis predicts PD-L1 status from H&E-stained histopathology images in breast cancer, Nat Commun source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Korbar and colleagues (72) developed a deep learning model to classify colorectal polyps into one of five common types based on H&E whole slide images.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Lung and Colorectal Cancers
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [72] Korbar, 2017, Deep learning for classification of colorectal polyps on whole-slide images, J Pathol Inform source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Kartasalo and colleagues (67) have developed an AI model using H&E images to detect perineural invasion-a key prognostic marker associated with poor outcomes in prostate cancer.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Prostate Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [67] Kartasalo, 2022, Detection of perineural invasion in prostate needle biopsies with deep neural networks, Virchows Arch source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“This application is beginning to be commercialized, such as the CE-marked product (101) developed by Owkin to predict MSI from H&E images.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Colorectal Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [101] Owkin: MSIntuit CRC | AI Cancer Testing
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Ozyoruk and colleagues (43) also demonstrated the potential of using AI to facilitate intraoperative subtyping of NSCLC by transforming cryosectioned tissue slides into the style of standard formalin-fixed and paraffinembedded slides.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Lung and Colorectal Cancers
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [43] Ozyoruk, 2022, A deep-learning model for transforming the style of tissue images from cryosectioned to formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded, Nat Biomed Eng source
boostedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“AI company ArteraAI has developed and tested a multimodal AI approach (113, 114) that uses histology images and clinical data to predict prostate cancer prognosis.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Prostate Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [113] Esteva, 2022, Prostate cancer therapy personalization via multi-modal deep learning on randomized phase III clinical trials, NPJ Digit Med source
- Not checked yetcites [114] Spratt, 2023, Artificial intelligence predictive model for hormone therapy use in prostate cancer, NEJM Evid source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Histopathologic classification studies have been reported in colorectal cancer (70,71).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Lung and Colorectal Cancers
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [70] Shaban, 2020, Context-aware convolutional neural network for grading of colorectal cancer histology images, IEEE Trans Med Imaging source
- Not checked yetcites [71] Yu, 2021, Accurate recognition of colorectal cancer with semi-supervised deep learning on pathological images, Nat Commun source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Efforts are also under way to use AI to improve prostate cancer prognostication.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Prostate Cancer
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Deep learning methods are also having an impact on emerging novel therapeutic approaches involving molecular oncology.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Molecular Oncology
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Robust, generalizable AI models require vast amounts of training data, ideally sourced from multiple, independent sources (160).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Data Curation and Sharing
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [160] Sheller, 2020, Federated learning in medicine: facilitating multi-institutional collaborations without sharing patient data, Sci Rep source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Of these, a particularly clinically advanced area is the use of deep learning to automatically contour Organs at Risk within clinical images such as CT, positron emission tomography and computed tomography (PET-CT), and MRI.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Radiotherapy
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This includes the use of AI in nearly every step of next-generation sequencing (NGS) processing and interpretation, including mutation identification (122, 123), artifact filtering (124), and driver gene identification (125).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Molecular Oncology
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [122] Khazeeva, 2022, DeNovoCNN: a deep learning approach to de novo variant calling in next-generation sequencing data, Nucleic Acids Res source
- Not checked yetcites [123] Sahraeian, 2022, Achieving robust somatic mutation detection with deep learning models derived from reference data sets of a cancer sample, Genome Biol source
- Not checked yetcites [124] Jongbloed, 2023, Machine learning-based somatic variant calling in cell-free DNA of metastatic breast cancer patients using large NGS panels, Sci Rep source
- Not checked yetcites [125] Luo, 2019, Predicting cancer driver genes based on somatic mutations using deep convolutional neural networks, Front Genet source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Several companies have developed AI-assisted scribing technologies to generate documentation based on transcriptions of a clinical encounter (155, 156).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Optimizing Administrative Workflows and Patient Engagement
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [155] DeepScribe: AI-powered medical scribe
- Not checked yetcites [156] Nuance Communications: ambient clinical intelligence | automatically document care
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“It is even more acutely important for rare cancers, where individual sites may only treat a small number of such patients, and multisite data integration is necessary to establish meaningful scientific or clinical insights (161).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Data Curation and Sharing
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [161] Pati, 2022, Federated learning enables big data for rare cancer boundary detection, Nat Commun source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“A study by Lu and colleagues (138) has also demonstrated the potential of using AI to predict tumor origin from routine histology slides.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Molecular Oncology
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [138] Lu, 2021, AI-based pathology predicts origins for cancers of unknown primary, Nature source
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Multiple non-deep learning clinical trial matching applications now exist.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Clinical Trial Matching and Automated Prescreening
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Documentation and coding requirements in modern EMRs are extensive, imposing a significant time burden on clinicians (153)”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Optimizing Administrative Workflows and Patient Engagement
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [153] Arndt, 2017, Tethered to the EHR: primary care physician workload assessment using EHR event log data and time-motion observations, Ann Fam Med source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Multiple AI methods have been developed to perform these predictions.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Molecular Oncology
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“ChatGPT was shown to exhibit good performance at answering questions about cancer myths and misconceptions (159).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Optimizing Administrative Workflows and Patient Engagement
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [159] Johnson, 2023, Using ChatGPT to evaluate cancer myths and misconceptions: artificial intelligence and cancer information, JNCI Cancer Spectr source
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Multiple companies have now received FDA clearances and/or EU certification for these approaches (K201232, K223774, K211881 RRID:SCR_012945).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Radiotherapy
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites K201232
- Not checked yetcites K223774
- Not checked yetcites K211881
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“This is the standard, default approach used in most commercial and academic AI efforts to date.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Data Curation and Sharing
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [161] Pati, 2022, Federated learning enables big data for rare cancer boundary detection, Nat Commun source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“clinical trial matching is usually framed as a natural language processing (NLP) challenge, where patient medical records-usually only available as unstructured clinical notes-are matched against inclusion and exclusion clinical trial criteria (148).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Clinical Trial Matching and Automated Prescreening
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [148] von Itzstein, 2021, Application of information technology to clinical trial evaluation and enrollment: a review, JAMA Oncol source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Many patients with advanced cancer, for example, do not fully grasp the palliative intent of their treatment (158).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Optimizing Administrative Workflows and Patient Engagement
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [158] Weeks, 2012, Patients’ expectations about effects of chemotherapy for advanced cancer, N Engl J Med source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“and contributing to burnout (154)”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Optimizing Administrative Workflows and Patient Engagement
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [154] Robertson, 2017, Electronic health record effects on work-life balance and burnout within the i3 population collaborative, J Grad Med Educ source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The advent of LLMs now offers a renewed opportunity to improve NLP trial matching.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Clinical Trial Matching and Automated Prescreening
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overall, these recent endeavors suggest that LLMs offer promising applications for clinical decision support in oncology”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Treatment Decision Support
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“An overarching challenge in AI in medicine is ensuring fairness in performance and use across populations (173).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Bias and Fairness
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [173] Chen, 2023, Algorithmic fairness in artificial intelligence for medicine and healthcare, Nat Biomed Eng source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The United States currently follows a centralized model of medical device regulation, overseen by the FDA.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Regulation and Evaluation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“A study by Pati and colleagues (161) also used FL across 71 sites to predict tumor boundaries within multiparametric MRI scans of glioblastoma patients.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Data Curation and Sharing
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [161] Pati, 2022, Federated learning enables big data for rare cancer boundary detection, Nat Commun source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Multiple clinical trials have now also published results in the past two years, such as those described in the breast cancer and colorectal screening sections above.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Regulation and Evaluation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Conversely, AI offers opportunities to mitigate healthcare disparities that are already known to exist (174, 175).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Bias and Fairness
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Beyond using general-purpose foundation models like GPT-4, there are increasing efforts in building domain-specific foundation models for healthcare (171), including pathology (ref.172; arXiv:2309.07778 and arXiv:2307.12914).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Data Curation and Sharing
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“One challenge in monitoring the progress of regulatory clearances is the lack of up-to-date, frequently refreshing databases focused on AI devices and their specific characteristics.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Regulation and Evaluation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The FDA has released a list of AI-enabled devices (193) on a yearly basis for the last few years, which is very valuable for the field, yet the rapid progress and value of aggregating more detailed characteristics creates a strong need for complementary solutions.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Regulation and Evaluation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [193] FDA. Artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML)-enabled medical devices
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“These include trials involving AI-based chatbots, such as use in genetic counseling (NCT05562778, NCT04354675 RRID:SCR_002309).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Regulation and Evaluation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites NCT05562778
- Not checked yetcites NCT04354675
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“To this end, the U.S. FDA is developing a pathway for a”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Regulation and Evaluation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [189] FDA. marketing submission recommendations for a predetermined change control plan for artificial intelligence/machine learning (AI/ML): enabled device software functions: draft guidance for industry and Food and Drug Administration staff
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Similarly, the EU AI Act will require device manufactures to document their strategy for modifying and subsequently testing and validating AI medical devices (190).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Regulation and Evaluation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [190] Vokinger, 2021, Regulating AI in medicine in the United States and Europe, Nat Mach Intell source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The majority of AI approaches described above have been unimodal, such as making predictions from a medical image alone.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Data Curation and Sharing
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“For instance, Chen and colleagues (75) developed an approach to fuse genomic data and histopathology images to predict survival in a pan-cancer cohort.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Data Curation and Sharing
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [75] Chen, 2022, Pan-cancer integrative histology-genomic analysis via multimodal deep learning, Cancer Cell source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The diversity of public data sets is a challenge across other oncology applications, including popular genomics data sets, such as TCGA (181) and GENIE (182).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Bias and Fairness
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, oncologists rely on the totality of information regarding a patient-including radiology images, pathology images, lab values, genomic data, family history, and prior clinical notes-to provide optimal care.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Data Curation and Sharing
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
In the paper
“Boehm and colleagues (170) used TCGA and an internal cohort to fuse genomic data, histopathology imaging, and radiology imaging to predict survival in high-grade serous ovarian cancer.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Data Curation and Sharing
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [170] Boehm, 2022, Multimodal data integration using machine learning improves risk stratification of high-grade serous ovarian cancer, Nat Cancer source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Muehlematter and colleagues (195) surveyed all approved AI medical devices in both the United States and the EU for the period 2015 to 2020 and also found that a majority of approved devices in both the United States and the EU were radiology focused.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Regulation and Evaluation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [195] Muehlematter, 2021, Approval of artificial intelligence and machine learning-based medical devices in the USA and Europe (2015–20): a comparative analysis, Lancet Digit Health source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The FDA regulates AI applications under the umbrella of Software as a Medical Device (SaMD) with similar regulatory processes as other SaMD devices and non-AI algorithms (187).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Regulation and Evaluation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [187] Harvey, 2020, How the FDA regulates AI, Acad Radiol source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Additionally, ArteraAI has developed a clinically available laboratory-developed test to predict prostate cancer prognosis by integrating digital pathology images with clinical metadata (115).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Data Curation and Sharing
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [115]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“This lack of reimbursement also makes it challenging to assess the true extent of clinical integration, as traditional methods for measuring medical device use such as insurance claims data cannot be used except for a small number of applications (211).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Integrating into Clinical Workflows
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [211] Wu, 2023, Characterizing the clinical adoption of medical AI devices through U.S. insurance claims, NEJM AI source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In particular, there is a growing number of AI”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Integrating into Clinical Workflows
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“There are ongoing efforts to provide more structured explainability, such as representing AI predictions in terms of human-interpretable concepts (205-207) and language-based explanations (medRxiv 2023.06.07.23291119; refs.208, 209).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Integrating into Clinical Workflows
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [205] Kim, 2018, Interpretability beyond feature attribution: quantitative testing with concept activation vectors (TCAV)
- Not checked yetcites [206] Koh, 2020, Concept bottleneck models.
- Not checked yetcites [207] Yuksekgonul, 2023, Post-hoc concept bottleneck models. In:
- Not checked yetcites medRxiv 2023.06.07.23291119
- Not checked yetcites [208] Agarwal, 2023, Representing visual classification as a linear combination of words
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) Network currently provides a growing set of reporting guidelines specific to AI in healthcare and oncology (197).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Regulation and Evaluation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [197] Simera, 2010, Transparent and accurate reporting increases reliability, utility, and impact of your research: reporting guidelines and the EQUATOR Network, BMC Med source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“To this end, explainability is an often-cited challenge for”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Integrating into Clinical Workflows
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [203] Rudin, 2019, Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high-stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead, Nat Mach Intell source
- Not checked yetcites [204] van der Velden, 2022, Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) in deep learning-based medical image analysis, Med Image Anal source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Rather than having each AI application interface separately with clinical systems, these platforms, such as those developed by Nvidia (212) and CARPL (213), serve as a single interface and orchestrate the execution of multiple AI algorithms based on rule-based logic.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Integrating into Clinical Workflows
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [212] NVIDIA Clara supercharges next gen medical devices
- Not checked yetcites [213] CARPL Platform
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“with a recent report indicating that the scope of explainability offered in FDA-cleared devices for medical imaging is often limited (medRxiv 2023.11.28.23299132).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Integrating into Clinical Workflows
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites medRxiv 2023.11.28.23299132
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 82
- Probably not a substantial claim. 52
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A search of ClinicalTrials.gov of”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Regulation and Evaluation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This includes the storage of patient data in electronic medical record (EMR) systems, the digitization of radiology and pathology imaging (3), and the increasing adoption of routine genomic profiling (4).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“the review focuses on the four most common cancer types: breast, prostate, lung, and colorectal, accounting for 50% of all new cancer cases in 2023 (7).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [7] Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER): cancer stat facts: common cancer sites
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly being applied to all aspects of oncology.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > INTRODUCTION
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In particular, advances in deep learning (1) over the past decade have made it feasible to learn complex patterns directly from real-world data, making it the core driver of AI advances in and out of healthcare (2).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the case of mammography, there are now multiple commercial AI devices cleared by the U.S. Federal Drug Administration (FDA) and/or the European Union (EU) that are designed to aid radiologists in breast cancer detection.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > INTRODUCTION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although not yet uniformly adopted across imaging providers or cancer hospitals, there are multiple FDAcleared and/or EU-certified commercial devices in the cancer detection domain and multiple reported clinical trials.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > CANCER DETECTION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There are also multiple ongoing clinical trials evaluating the real-world effectiveness of such systems.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > INTRODUCTION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“the Mirai system developed by Yala and colleagues ( 12) is designed to predict 5-year cancer risk directly from mammograms and has been retrospectively evaluated across multiple hospitals.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Breast Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [12] Yala, 2022, Multi-institutional validation of a mammography-based breast cancer risk model, J Clin Oncol source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“These data can be used to build and train AI models, and critically, the real-time availability of these data can enable individualized, clinically relevant AI predictions to further the goal of precision oncology (5).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [5] Garraway, 2013, Precision oncology: an overview, J Clin Oncol source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“AI applications for these cancer types serve as a good representation of the current state of the field, especially as their prevalence facilitates large-scale data collection and encourages clinical application.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > INTRODUCTION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“a longer-term, prospective clinical trial is now seeking to assess the connection between colonoscopy CADe systems and incidence and mortality from colorectal cancer after a 10-year follow-up period (25).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Colorectal Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [25] Mori, 2022, Clinical trial designs for artificial intelligence in gastrointestinal endoscopy, Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: fails — The authors may not put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“groups have reported on the use of deep learning for breast cancer diagnosis and subtyping from H&E slides (49)(50)(51), and quantifying other clinically relevant features such as mitotic cell counting (52,53).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Breast Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [49] Sui, 2021, A pyramid architecture-based deep learning framework for breast cancer detection, BioMed Res Int source
- Not checked yetcites [50] Sandbank, 2022, Validation and real-world clinical application of an artificial intelligence algorithm for breast cancer detection in biopsies, NPJ Breast Cancer source
- Not checked yetcites [51] Couture, 2018, Image analysis with deep learning to predict breast cancer grade, ER status, histologic subtype, and intrinsic subtype, NPJ Breast Cancer source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The CAMELYON16/17 data have subsequently become a standard benchmark for deep learning models in pathology.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Breast Cancer
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In a retrospective study, pathologists demonstrated improved sensitivity in diagnosing prostate cancer when using the AI platform, along with a reduction in review time and no statistically significant change in specificity.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Prostate Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [60] Raciti, 2020, Novel artificial intelligence system increases the detection of prostate cancer in whole slide images of core needle biopsies, Mod Pathol source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Since 2013, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force has recommended low-dose computed tomography to screen for lung cancer in high-risk populations (26).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Lung Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [26] US Preventive Services Task Force, 2021, Screening for lung cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement, JAMA source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The AI company Paige has also recently been granted FDA Breakthrough Device Designation status for Paige Lymph Node, providing a path for accelerated FDA clearance (48).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Breast Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [48] U.S. FDA grants Paige breakthrough device designation for cancer detection in breast lymph nodes
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“There have been many AI efforts in this domain, including those aimed at directly classifying clinically significant prostate cancer and approaches to quantify clinically relevant features such as segmenting and measuring the volume of the prostate gland (35).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Prostate Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [35] Li, 2022, Machine learning in prostate MRI for prostate cancer: current status and future opportunities, Diagnostics source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The platform was subsequently validated in an external cohort (61) and eventually cleared by the FDA (DEN200080, RRID:SCR_012945).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Prostate Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [61] da Silva, 2021, Independent real-world application of a clinical-grade automated prostate cancer detection system, J Pathol source
- Not checked yetcites DEN200080
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Google developed LYmph Node Assistant (LYNA; ref. 46) and reported that pathologists who used the system were able to detect significantly more micrometastases with shorter review time.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Breast Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [46] Steiner, 2018, Impact of deep learning assistance on the histopathologic review of lymph nodes for metastatic breast cancer, Am J Surg Pathol source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Treatment decisions in breast cancer frequently hinge on the detection of such lesions (44), but pathology review remains labor intensive and subject to significant interreader variability (arXiv:1703.02442).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Breast Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [44] Giuliano, 2018, Eighth edition of the AJCC cancer staging manual: breast cancer, Ann Surg Oncol source
- Not checked yetcites arXiv:1703.02442
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Sandbank and colleagues (50) have recently presented a deep learning model for classifying invasive and noninvasive breast cancer subtypes and generating 51 predicted clinical and morphologic features.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Breast Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [50] Sandbank, 2022, Validation and real-world clinical application of an artificial intelligence algorithm for breast cancer detection in biopsies, NPJ Breast Cancer source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“AI has been applied to each of these tasks, though these applications are generally further from clinical adoption with fewer FDA or EU clearances than the imaging-based detection applications described above.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > CANCER DIAGNOSIS
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Ardila and colleagues (29) developed an approach to localize lung nodules and predict their likelihood of malignancy, where this model is now licensed by the AI company Aidence (30).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Lung Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [29] Ardila, 2019, End-to-end lung cancer screening with three-dimensional deep learning on low-dose chest computed tomography, Nat Med source
- Not checked yetcites [30] 2022, Aidence and Google Health enter into collaboration to help improve lung cancer screening with AI
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“the Prostate Imaging-Cancer AI (PI-CAI) challenge enables participants to train on a multicenter, multivendor data set of 1,500 MRI prostate exams (36).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Prostate Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [36] Sunoqrot, 2022, Artificial intelligence for prostate MRI: open datasets, available applications, and grand challenges, Eur Radiol Exp source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Much of this work has now been integrated into Stratipath (59), a Swedishbased AI start-up focused on digital pathology.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Breast Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [59] Stratipath Breast
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Radiotherapy is a critical therapeutic approach for multiple cancer types, and an intense area of AI research, development, and commercialization.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Radiotherapy
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“These efforts include histology (102) and CT-based (103) models for survival prediction, and the correlation of CT imaging features with histology risk factors (104).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Lung Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [102] Yu, 2016, Predicting non-small cell lung cancer prognosis by fully automated microscopic pathology image features, Nat Commun source
- Not checked yetcites [103] Saad, 2023, Predicting benefit from immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer by CT-based ensemble deep learning: a retrospective study, Lancet Digit Health source
- Not checked yetcites [104] Nam, 2022, Histopathologic basis for a chest CT deep learning survival prediction model in patients with lung adenocarcinoma, Radiology source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This includes the use of AI at all steps of radiotherapy, including image segmentation, treatment planning, outcome prediction, quality assurance, and AIguided radiosurgery (116).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Radiotherapy
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [116] Li, 2022, Artificial intelligence in radiotherapy, Semin Cancer Biol source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Additionally, CEmarked products exist for quantifying PD-L1 expression from IHC slides (109-111).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Lung Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [109] Aiforia achieves CE-IVD mark for clinical PD-L1 AI model in lung cancer diagnostics
- Not checked yetcites [110] Mindpeak Solutions: plug-and-play AI solution to detect and quantify PD-L1 (SP263) within predefined ROIs in non-small-cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC)
- Not checked yetcites [111]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“There have additionally been several validation studies of histopathology-based prognostic models (95,96), including a study demonstrating that a prognostic feature previously identified through AI analysis can be learned and used by pathologists (95).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Colorectal Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [95] L'Imperio, 2023, Pathologist validation of a machine learning–derived feature for colon cancer risk stratification, JAMA Netw Open source
- Not checked yetcites [96] Skrede, 2020, Deep learning for prediction of colorectal cancer outcome: a discovery and validation study, Lancet Lond Engl source
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although there are some clinically available devices for these tasks, they tend to be further from clinical maturity than cancer detection and diagnosis tasks.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > CANCER TREATMENT
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Nagpal and colleagues (62) used a deep learning model to predict Gleason scores using H&E images from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and reported significantly higher diagnostic accuracy compared with a cohort of 29 board-certified pathologists.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Prostate Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [62] Nagpal, 2019, Development and validation of a deep learning algorithm for improving Gleason scoring of prostate cancer, NPJ Digit Med source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“P-NET (112) is a sparse deep learning model that processes molecular profiling data in a biologically informed, pathway-driven fashion to predict prostate disease states such as metastases, where the resulting prediction scores were shown to independently correlate with prognosis.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Prostate Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [112] Elmarakeby, 2021, Biologically informed deep neural network for prostate cancer discovery, Nature source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Significant efforts have also been made in using AI for histopathologic diagnosis in lung and colorectal cancers, though FDA-cleared devices for these tasks do not exist at the time of writing.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Lung and Colorectal Cancers
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The approach included weakly supervised training to predict response from H&E whole slide images, with subsequent application of interpretability approaches to identify features that correlate with higher response predictions, such as the presence of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) and necrosis.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Breast Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [83] Ogier du Terrail, 2023, Federated learning for predicting histological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in triple-negative breast cancer, Nat Med source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Models such as BERT (80), GPT (81), and ChatGPT (arXiv:2303.08774)are rapidly diffusing into industry, and healthcare-specific models are also being developed (ref.82; arXiv:2106.03598,arXiv:1904.05342).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > CANCER TREATMENT
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [80] Devlin, 2019, Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding
- Not checked yetcites [81] Brown, 2020, Language models are few-shot learners
- Not checked yetcites arXiv:2303.08774
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Amgad and colleagues (84) explicitly enforce interpretability by using deep learning to extract human-interpretable features, and subsequently use these features to generate a risk score for breast cancer prognosis.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Breast Cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [84] Amgad, 2024, A population-level digital histologic biomarker for enhanced prognosis of invasive breast cancer, Nat Med source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Although the LLMs generated a wider range of treatment options compared with human experts, their recommendations often deviated from expert consensus.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Treatment Decision Support
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [151] Benary, 2023, Leveraging large language models for decision support in personalized oncology, JAMA Netw Open source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“CancerVar (131) is an AI platform that uses a deep learning framework to predict the oncogenicity of somatic variants using both functional and clinical features and may provide a robust alternative to manually curated databases, such as CiVIC (132) and OncoKB ( 133).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Molecular Oncology
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [131] Li, 2022, CancerVar: an artificial intelligence-empowered platform for clinical interpretation of somatic mutations in cancer, Sci Adv source
- Not checked yetcites [132] Griffith, 2017, CIViC is a community knowledgebase for expert crowdsourcing the clinical interpretation of variants in cancer, Nat Genet source
- Not checked yetcites [133] Chakravarty, 2017, OncoKB: a precision oncology knowledge base, JCO Precis Oncol
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“personalized cancer vaccines are being tested in a wide variety of clinical indications, and recent trial data indicate their potential role in combination with existing immune-checkpoint blockade (139).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Molecular Oncology
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [139] Khattak, 2023, Abstract CT001: a personalized cancer vaccine, mRNA-4157, combined with pembrolizumab versus pembrolizumab in patients with resected high-risk melanoma: efficacy and safety results from the randomized, open-label Phase 2 mRNA-4157-P201/Keynote-942 trial, Cancer Res source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Applied to 37 cancer types from the Pan-Cancer Analysis of Whole Genomes data set (128), Dig identified several potential cryptic splice sites, recurrent variants in noncoding regions, as well as mutations in rarely mutated genes.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Molecular Oncology
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [128] ICGC/TCGA Pan-Cancer Analysis of Whole Genomes Consortium, 2020, Pan-cancer analysis of whole genomes, Nature source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These challenges include obtaining and sharing robust medical data, risks to patient privacy, and ensuring fairness in AI performance across all patients.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“AI applications are also now advancing in the fields of image-guided radiotherapy, adaptive radiotherapy, stereotactic radiosurgery (119), and surgery in general, where autocontouring is similarly helpful (120).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Radiotherapy
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“A 2022 meta-analysis reported on 10 published studies across multiple commercial and academic platforms and found that most applications offered comparable, if not superior performance to manual screening, with dramatic improvements in efficiency (149).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Clinical Trial Matching and Automated Prescreening
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [149] Chow, 2023, Use of artificial intelligence for cancer clinical trial enrollment: a systematic review and meta-analysis, J Natl Cancer Inst source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“A recent study by Radici and colleagues (117) evaluated the FDAcleared and CE-marked Limbus Contour (LC) AI platform for autocontouring within a single European tertiary cancer hospital and found that the technology significantly reduced the procedure time and interobserver variability.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Radiotherapy
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [117] Radici, 2022, Implementation of a commercial deep learning-based auto segmentation software in radiotherapy: evaluation of effectiveness and impact on workflow, Life Basel Switz
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“only 6% of patients with cancer enroll in clinical trials (144) and there continue to be race-, sex-, and age-based disparities within clinical trials (145, 146).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Clinical Trial Matching and Automated Prescreening
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [144] Unger, 2021, Nationally representative estimates of the participation of cancer patients in clinical research studies according to the commission on cancer, J Clin Oncol source
- Not checked yetcites [145] Murthy, 2004, Participation in cancer clinical trials: race-, sex-, and age-based disparities, JAMA source
- Not checked yetcites [146] Kwiatkowski, 2013, Inclusion of minorities and women in cancer clinical trials, a decade later: have we improved?, Cancer source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Transcriptomic-based algorithms have also been developed (136, 137), although these approaches will require expansion of clinical transcriptome profiling for assessments of generalizability.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Molecular Oncology
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [136] Grewal, 2019, Application of a neural network whole transcriptome-based pan-cancer method for diagnosis of primary and metastatic cancers, JAMA Netw Open source
- Not checked yetcites [137] Divate, 2022, Deep learning-based pan-cancer classification model reveals tissue-of-origin specific gene expression signatures, Cancers source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As more AI models reach the clinic, there are also challenges in effectively integrating AI applications into clinical workflows and assessing the ultimate impact on patients and healthcare systems.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Despite these limitations, LLMs were able to correctly identify several important treatment strategies and even suggested some reasonable options that were not readily apparent to experts (151).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Treatment Decision Support
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [151] Benary, 2023, Leveraging large language models for decision support in personalized oncology, JAMA Netw Open source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The method outperformed multiple other methods for driver identification in accuracy and power and ran multiple orders of magnitude faster.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Molecular Oncology
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [127] Sherman, 2022, Genome-wide mapping of somatic mutation rates uncovers drivers of cancer, Nat Biotechnol source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“multiple groups have now reported on the use of LLMs to effectively extract structured data from clinical notes (150) and to match patients to clinical trials (arXiv:2303.16756,arXiv:2306.02077,arXiv:2304.07396, and arXiv:2308.02180).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Clinical Trial Matching and Automated Prescreening
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [150] Agrawal, Large language models are few-shot clinical information extractors source
- Not checked yetcites arXiv:2303.16756
- Not checked yetcites arXiv:2306.02077
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This is particularly important in cancer, where each site is limited in patient size, patient diversity, and its own set of embedded clinical practices.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Data Curation and Sharing
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The interpretation of germline and somatic mutations observed in cancer continues to be a challenge, and new AI tools are also emerging to automatically annotate and interpret variants.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Molecular Oncology
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Performance was generally promising, though there were cases in which the model arguably provided outdated information, such as investigational drug names (152).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Treatment Decision Support
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [152] Schulte, 2023, Capacity of ChatGPT to identify guideline-based treatments for advanced solid tumors, Cureus
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“that risks driving providers away from clinical practice and impairing access to care.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Optimizing Administrative Workflows and Patient Engagement
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The clinical trial system also suffers from overall inefficiencies, where 20% of trials are prematurely terminated, many due to insufficient accrual of patients (147).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Clinical Trial Matching and Automated Prescreening
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [147] Stensland, 2014, Adult cancer clinical trials that fail to complete: an epidemic?, J Natl Cancer Inst source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“MD Anderson Cancer Center is also creating a comprehensive AI-based Radiation Planning Assistant for autocontouring and radiotherapy planning, and will primarily target low-and middleincome countries, where AI can provide scalable assistance (118).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Radiotherapy
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [118] MD Anderson Cancer Center: Radiation Planning Assistant
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This includes genomics-based algorithms, where targeted NGS algorithms have been rigorously evaluated and are currently being deployed and assessed for clinical utility (134, 135).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Molecular Oncology
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [134] Penson, 2020, Development of genome-derived tumor type prediction to inform clinical cancer care, JAMA Oncol source
- Not checked yetcites [135] Moon, 2023, Machine learning for genetics-based classification and treatment response prediction in cancer of unknown primary, Nat Med source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Beyond training, AI models must also be tested across multiple independent sites and evaluated for overall accuracy and potential bias (162).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Data Curation and Sharing
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [162] Karargyris, 2023, Federated benchmarking of medical artificial intelligence with MedPerf, Nat Mach Intell source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Rich molecular data are increasingly critical for personalized cancer treatment across cancer types.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Molecular Oncology
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“An additional long-standing diagnostic challenge is cell-oforigin prediction, which is particularly relevant for cancers of unknown primary where accurate origin information could significantly affect treatment strategy.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Molecular Oncology
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Properly deployed, AI could increase efficiencies and patient diversity within the clinical trial system and assist physicians in matching patients to clinical trials.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Clinical Trial Matching and Automated Prescreening
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The third option is federated learning (FL), where data remain private at each institution, but machine learning models are jointly updated and shared in a distributed fashion (166, 167).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Data Curation and Sharing
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“These different data modalities are likely to contain distinct and complementary information; thus, multimodal AI is an active area of research in oncology (168, 169).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Data Curation and Sharing
What the sources say
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Importantly, given this classification, randomized controlled clinical trials are not typically required by the FDA, though this can depend on the device's intended use.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Regulation and Evaluation
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Neither the United States nor the EU currently has AI-specific regulatory approval pathways for AI-based medical tools.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Regulation and Evaluation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although clinical trials in AI oncology remain rare, we are now starting to see an uptick in such trials.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Regulation and Evaluation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“A particularly evolving and debated topic is the regulation of LLMs, and in which contexts and intended uses do they qualify as medical devices (191,192).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Regulation and Evaluation
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These efforts further emphasize the need for robust data sets, as the same data set and even model architecture can be used to support multiple clinical tasks.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Data Curation and Sharing
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Rather, both regulate AI healthcare applications as medical devices and categorize such devices based on the level of risk posed to individual patients.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Regulation and Evaluation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Both of these considerations certainly apply in oncology, where potential sources of bias span the full patient care and AI life-cycle continuums.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Bias and Fairness
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In clinical practice, there are known disparities in access to newer imaging technologies and patient outcomes for underserved populations, such as Black women (176-178).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Bias and Fairness
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [176] Christensen, 2023, Relationship between race and access to newer mammographic technology in women with medicare insurance, Radiology source
- Not checked yetcites [177] Rauscher, 2012, Disparities in screening mammography services by race/ethnicity and health insurance, J Womens Health source
- Not checked yetcites [178] Martini, 2022, Breast cancer disparities in outcomes; unmasking biological determinants associated with racial and genetic diversity, Clin Exp Metastasis source
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“An aspect that is closely tied to regulation is the evaluation of devices to ensure safe and effective performance, where clinical trials remain the gold standard in assessing new clinical interventions.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Regulation and Evaluation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The same study also found that breast cancer was the most commonly cited cancer type (31%), most commonly associated with radiology, providing further evidence of the advancing maturity of AI in mammography.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Regulation and Evaluation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [194] Luchini, 2022, Artificial intelligence in oncology: current applications and future perspectives, Br J Cancer source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“A critical component of AI evaluation and development more generally is ensuring transparency and reproducibility, allowing independent research groups to review and build on prior scientific progress (196).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Regulation and Evaluation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [196] Haibe-Kains, 2020, Transparency and reproducibility in artificial intelligence, Nature source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The requirements for FDA clearance depend largely on the class and intended use of the device, with device classes ranging from I (lowest risk) to III (highest risk).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Regulation and Evaluation
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Fairness and diversity have especially important considerations in such applications given that genetic ancestry may be causally related to some genetic traits and diseases (178, 183-186), as opposed to the social construct of race (173).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Bias and Fairness
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [178] Martini, 2022, Breast cancer disparities in outcomes; unmasking biological determinants associated with racial and genetic diversity, Clin Exp Metastasis source
- Not checked yetcites [183] Zhang, 2019, Characterization of frequently mutated cancer genes in Chinese breast tumors: a comparison of Chinese and TCGA cohorts, Ann Transl Med source
- Not checked yetcites [184] Mahal, 2020, Racial differences in genomic profiling of prostate cancer, N Engl J Med source
- Not checked yetcites [185] Gusev, 2016, Atlas of prostate cancer heritability in European and African-American men pinpoints tissue-specific regulation, Nat Commun source
- Not checked yetcites [186] Nassar, 2022, Ancestry-driven recalibration of tumor mutational burden and disparate clinical outcomes in response to immune checkpoint inhibitors, Cancer Cell source
- Not checked yetcites [173] Chen, 2023, Algorithmic fairness in artificial intelligence for medicine and healthcare, Nat Biomed Eng source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Although FL introduces a number of logistical and algorithmic complexities, progress has been made in narrowing the gap in model performance between FL and centralized learning (160), where FL has now been successfully applied to multiple cancer applications.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Data Curation and Sharing
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [160] Sheller, 2020, Federated learning in medicine: facilitating multi-institutional collaborations without sharing patient data, Sci Rep source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The vast majority of AI devices thus far, including those in oncology, fall under Class II, for which the FDA 510(k) pathway applies and requires the device to be”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Regulation and Evaluation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [187] Harvey, 2020, How the FDA regulates AI, Acad Radiol source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These algorithms are largely designed to assist clinicians in making diagnoses and/or quantify image-based properties (e.g., lesion size), but the clinician makes the final call.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Regulation and Evaluation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Altogether, there is growing awareness of the fairness of AI algorithms, including guidance from regulatory bodies, but there remains much room for improvement in reducing bias in AI and healthcare more broadly.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Bias and Fairness
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The second option is deidentification and public release of data, usually via a consortium model.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Data Curation and Sharing
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [45] Ehteshami Bejnordi, 2017, Diagnostic assessment of deep learning algorithms for detection of lymph node metastases in women with breast cancer, JAMA source
- Not checked yetcites [165] Mullainathan, 2022, Solving medicine's data bottleneck: Nightingale Open Science, Nat Med source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“For example, Luchini and colleagues (194) summarized 71 FDA-cleared devices in oncology (up to 2021) and found that radiology accounted for the majority of approved devices (54.9%), followed by pathology (19.7%).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Regulation and Evaluation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [194] Luchini, 2022, Artificial intelligence in oncology: current applications and future perspectives, Br J Cancer source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This work leverages the TCGA database, which has become a critical multimodal data set to advance AI efforts.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Data Curation and Sharing
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Such”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Treatment Decision Support
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites arXiv:2108.07258
plainconditional- Asserted: fails — The authors may not put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Within the EU, there is no one central agency that performs device assessments; rather, assessments are handled by accredited organizations, which are empowered to issue CE marks.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Regulation and Evaluation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Conversely, there are efforts to generate more diverse public data sets, such as EMBED (180), and instances where AI performance has generalized well across different patient populations (9,10,12).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Bias and Fairness
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [180] Jeong, 2023, The EMory BrEast imaging Dataset (EMBED): a racially diverse, granular dataset of 3.4 million screening and diagnostic mammographic images, Radiol Artif Intell source
- Not checked yetcites [9] McKinney, 2020, International evaluation of an AI system for breast cancer screening, Nature source
- Not checked yetcites [10] Lotter, 2021, Robust breast cancer detection in mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis using an annotation-efficient deep learning approach, Nat Med source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Most of the described AI applications fall under the purview of regulatory agencies, depending on regional regulations and the intended use of the device.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Regulation and Evaluation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The precise form of the AI results requires careful consideration of the clinical end goal and the intended use of the device.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Integrating into Clinical Workflows
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This is especially important for assessing potential biases in data sets and generalizability across different clinical settings.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Regulation and Evaluation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Critically, although AI will ideally improve healthcare outcomes, its biggest impact may ultimately be in improving resource allocation and access to quality care.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > FUTURE DIRECTIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Second, the healthcare value of AI deployment needs to be rigorously assessed and combined with aligned payment structures.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > FUTURE DIRECTIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Such workflows require integration into clinical systems, which can be especially challenging for proprietary systems with limited customization.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Integrating into Clinical Workflows
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This will require a greater investment in real-world studies and ideally randomized clinical trials, with an emphasis on critically evaluating AI generalizability across patient populations and clinical sites.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > FUTURE DIRECTIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Nonetheless, the future of AI oncology will not be driven by technology innovation alone.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > FUTURE DIRECTIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Rather, we see several fundamental requirements that will drive the future of AI in oncology (Fig. 4).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > FUTURE DIRECTIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“First, there is a strong need for an objective assessment of AI's impact on patient outcomes, defined in cancer-specific, clinically meaningful metrics.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > FUTURE DIRECTIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Finally, stakeholders must adopt objective processes for continuously monitoring AI impact and measuring patient safety.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > FUTURE DIRECTIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Realizing these benefits may require structural changes and new clinical workflows.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > FUTURE DIRECTIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Arguably, the greatest strength of data-driven, deep learning approaches is the ability to continually improve over time.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > FUTURE DIRECTIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Healthcare value is defined as the health outcome achieved per dollar spent (214) and is a critical metric for making informed healthcare investments.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > FUTURE DIRECTIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [214] Porter, 2010, What is value in health care?, N Engl J Med source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, realizing these benefits requires well-defined regulatory processes and joint efforts to continuously monitor AI devices over the long-term.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > FUTURE DIRECTIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Beyond initial hardware considerations, data pipelines must also be developed to efficiently route data to AI systems and subsequently make the AI results available to clinicians.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Integrating into Clinical Workflows
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Common approaches to XAI involve post hoc explanations, such as generating saliency maps that highlight aspects of the input that most contribute to the model's prediction (204).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Integrating into Clinical Workflows
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [204] van der Velden, 2022, Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) in deep learning-based medical image analysis, Med Image Anal source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The field of AI in oncology is developing at a rapid pace.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > FUTURE DIRECTIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Even with effective infrastructure and AI outputs, monetization and liability questions can hinder widespread adoption, where the vast majority of commercially available AI devices are not currently reimbursed (210).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Integrating into Clinical Workflows
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [210] Parikh, 2022, Paying for artificial intelligence in medicine, NPJ Digit Med source
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Additional guidelines include SPIRIT-AI (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials-Artificial Intelligence), which provides an extended set of 15 items for AI-focused protocol documents (199), and CONSORT-AI (Consolidated Standards of Reporting of Trials-Artificial Intelligence), which provides an extended set of 14 items for reporting on AI-focused clinical trials (200).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Authors' Disclosures
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [199] Rivera, 2020, Guidelines for clinical trial protocols for interventions involving artificial intelligence: the SPIRIT-AI extension, Lancet Digit Health source
- Not checked yetcites [200] Liu, 2020, Reporting guidelines for clinical trial reports for interventions involving artificial intelligence: the CONSORT-AI extension, Nat Med source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This includes MINIMAR (MINimum Information for Medical AI Reporting), which defines a minimal set of reporting elements covering study population and setting, patient demographics, model architecture, and model evaluation (198)”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Regulation and Evaluation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [198] Hernandez-Boussard, 2020, MINimum Information for Medical AI Reporting): developing reporting standards for artificial intelligence in health care, J Am Med Inform Assoc source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Finally, there is an increasing use of AI in analyzing real-world data (RWD), and the European Society for Medical Oncology Guidance for Reporting Oncology Real-World Evidence (ESMO-GROW) now provides publication guidelines regarding the use of RWD in oncology, along with specific AIfocused reporting guidelines (201).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Authors' Disclosures
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [201] Castelo-Branco, 2023, ESMO guidance for reporting oncology real-world evidence (GROW), Ann Oncol source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This necessity applies even to”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > FUTURE DIRECTIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Realizing the potential of AI in oncology requires effective integration into clinical workflows, which presents both logistical and scientific challenges (202).”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Integrating into Clinical Workflows
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [202] Chua, 2021, Artificial intelligence in oncology: path to implementation, Cancer Med source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As such, explainable AI (XAI) is a highly active area of research focused on conveying how an AI model arrived at its prediction.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Integrating into Clinical Workflows
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“AI applications require significant computational infrastructure (either on-premise or cloud-based) and highly skilled engineers-both of which are likely to extend already stretched healthcare information technology (IT) budgets.”
§ Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions > Integrating into Clinical Workflows
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
AI applications are accelerating from development to clinical use.
“This focus is motivated by the accelerated advancement of AI applications from development to clinical use.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Clinical trials are the primary mechanism for evaluating and advancing new cancer therapeutics.
“Clinical trials are the primary mechanism for evaluating and advancing new cancer therapeutics.”
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
“Modern clinical oncology faces an unprecedented data complexity that exceeds human analytical capacity”
From Artificial Intelligence in Clinical Oncology: From Productivity Enhancement to Creative Discovery (2025) · cites this paper as [1]
In the citing paper
“As of 2024, the FDA had cleared or approved approximately 700 AI/ML-enabled medical devices, 76% of which are related to radiology.”
From Artificial Intelligence in Clinical Oncology: From Productivity Enhancement to Creative Discovery (2025) · cites this paper as [1]
Citations
Cites
LeCun, Y., Bengio, Y., & Hinton, G. (2015) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature14539 · Cited by 84,126
Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold
Jumper, J., Evans, R., Pritzel, A., Green, T., Figurnov, M., Ronneberger, O., Tunyasuvunakool, K., Bates, R., Žídek, A., Potapenko, A., et al. (2021) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03819-2 · Cited by 43,764
Language Models are Few-Shot Learners
Brown, T. B., Mann, B., Ryder, N., Subbiah, M., Kaplan, J., Dhariwal, P., Neelakantan, A., Shyam, P., Sastry, G., Askell, A., et al. (2020) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2005.14165 · Cited by 23,372
Advances in neural information processing systems 7
(1996) · Computers & Mathematics with Applications · doi:10.1016/s0898-1221(96)90463-0 · Cited by 14,759
Reduced Lung-Cancer Mortality with Low-Dose Computed Tomographic Screening
The National Lung Screening Trial Research Team (2011) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1102873 · Cited by 11,064
Rudin, C. (2019) · Nature Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1038/s42256-019-0048-x · Cited by 10,561
High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence
Topol, E. J. (2019) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41591-018-0300-7 · Cited by 10,450
Proceedings of the 25th international conference on Machine learning
Cohen, W. W., McCallum, A., & Roweis, S. T. (2008) · Cited by 5,691
Porter, M. E. (2010) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmp1011024 · Cited by 5,084
Large language models encode clinical knowledge
Singhal, K., Azizi, S., Tu, T., Mahdavi, S. S., Wei, J., Chung, H. W., Scales, N., Tanwani, A., Cole-Lewis, H., Pfohl, S., et al. (2023) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06291-2 · Cited by 4,083
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Devlin, 2019, Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding, 4171
- Kim, 2018, Interpretability beyond feature attribution: quantitative testing with concept activation vectors (TCAV), 2668
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Hsu, C.-Y., Askar, S., Alshkarchy, S. S., Nayak, P. P., Attabi, K. A. L., Khan, M. A., Mayan, J. A., Sharma, M. K., Islomov, S., & Soleimani Samarkhazan, H. (2025) · Clinical and Experimental Medicine · doi:10.1007/s10238-025-01965-9 · Cited by 140
“Emerging solutions include the development of “fed - erated regulatory sandboxes” that permit provisional model validation under harmonized international guidelines [ 73].”
AI-driven biomarker discovery: enhancing precision in cancer diagnosis and prognosis
Alum, E. U. (2025) · Discover Oncology · doi:10.1007/s12672-025-02064-7 · Cited by 159
Current Bioinformatics Tools in Precision Oncology
Wolde, T., Bhardwaj, V., & Pandey, V. (2025) · MedComm · doi:10.1002/mco2.70243 · Cited by 67
Using mathematical modelling and AI to improve delivery and efficacy of therapies in cancer
Harkos, C., Hadjigeorgiou, A. G., Voutouri, C., Kumar, A. S., Stylianopoulos, T., & Jain, R. K. (2025) · Nature reviews. Cancer · doi:10.1038/s41568-025-00796-w · Cited by 62
“Over the past decade, AI has emerged as a powerful tool in oncology, leveraging vast datasets to improve cancer detection, prognosis and drug discovery 34 (Fig.”
How AI is used in FDA-authorized medical devices: a taxonomy across 1,016 authorizations
Singh, R., Bapna, M., Diab, A. R., Ruiz, E. S., & Lotter, W. (2025) · npj Digital Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41746-025-01800-1 · Cited by 61
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Lotter, W., Hassett, M. J., Schultz, N., Kehl, K. L., Van Allen, E. M., & Cerami, E.
- Affiliations
- Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
- Harvard University (US)
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (US)
- 3Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
- Corresponding author
- Cerami, Ethan
- ORCID
- Venue
- Cancer Discovery
- Published
- 2024-03-21
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 711-726
- ISSN
- 2159-8274 (ISSN-L)
- 2159-8290
- PMC
- PMC11131133
- OpenAlex
- W4394695940
- Cited by
- 196
- References
- 210
- Citations by year
- 2026: 87 · 2025: 92 · 2024: 17
- FWCI
- 4.42
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Cancer Discovery (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- Mark Foundation For Cancer Research (Emerging Leader Award)
- National Cancer Institute (P30 CA008748, P50CA272390)
- Nancy Lurie Marks Family Foundation
- Ellison Foundation
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in cancer detection
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
- Keywords
- artificial intelligence in oncology, clinical implementation of AI, cancer detection, cancer diagnosis, cancer therapy, diagnostic imaging, genomics, electronic health records, clinical translation
- MeSH terms
- Artificial Intelligence, Humans, Medical Oncology, Neoplasms
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-07, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-07 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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