Siegel RL, et al. Cancer statistics, 2025. CA Cancer J Clin. 2025;75(1):10–45.
Google Scholar
Bray F, et al. Global cancer statistics 2022: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2024;74(3):229–63.
Google Scholar
Chang T-G, et al. Hallmarks of artificial intelligence contributions to precision oncology. Nat Cancer. 2025;6(3):417–31.
Google Scholar
Yates J, Van Allen EM. New horizons at the interface of artificial intelligence and translational cancer research. Cancer Cell. 2025;43(4):708–27.
Google Scholar
Wang J, et al. Self-improving generative foundation model for synthetic medical image generation and clinical applications. Nat Med. 2025;31(2):609–17.
Google Scholar
Jumper J, et al. Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold. Nature. 2021;596(7873):583–9.
Google Scholar
Topol EJ. Learning the language of life with AI. Science. 2025;387(6733):eadv4414.
Google Scholar
Gong D, et al. Spatial oncology: translating contextual biology to the clinic. Cancer Cell. 2024;42(10):1653–75.
Google Scholar
Ligero M, et al. Artificial intelligence-based biomarkers for treatment decisions in oncology. Trends Cancer. 2025;11(3):232–44.
Google Scholar
Kleppe A, et al. A clinical decision support system optimising adjuvant chemotherapy for colorectal cancers by integrating deep learning and pathological staging markers: a development and validation study. Lancet Oncol. 2022;23(9):1221–32.
Google Scholar
Rosenthal JT, Beecy A, Sabuncu MR. Rethinking clinical trials for medical AI with dynamic deployments of adaptive systems. NPJ Digit Med. 2025;8(1):252.
Google Scholar
Xu Y, et al. Artificial intelligence: a powerful paradigm for scientific research. Innovation (Camb). 2021;2(4):100179.
Google Scholar
Dlamini Z, et al. Artificial intelligence (AI) and big data in cancer and precision oncology. Comput Struct Biotechnol J. 2020;18:2300–11.
Google Scholar
Sharma A, et al. Advances in AI and machine learning for predictive medicine. J Hum Genet. 2024;69(10):487–97.
Google Scholar
Mostavi M, et al. Convolutional neural network models for cancer type prediction based on gene expression. BMC Med Genomics. 2020;13(5):44.
Google Scholar
Mienye ID, Swart TG, Obaido G. Recurrent neural networks: a comprehensive review of architectures, variants, and applications. Information. 2024;15(9):517.
Zhou D, et al. Diagnostic evaluation of a deep learning model for optical diagnosis of colorectal cancer. Nat Commun. 2020;11(1):2961.
Google Scholar
Kominami Y, et al. Computer-aided diagnosis of colorectal polyp histology by using a real-time image recognition system and narrow-band imaging magnifying colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2016;83(3):643–9.
Google Scholar
Djinbachian R, et al. Autonomous artificial intelligence vs artificial intelligence-assisted human optical diagnosis of colorectal polyps: a randomized controlled trial. Gastroenterology. 2024;167(2):392-399.e2.
Google Scholar
McKinney SM, et al. International evaluation of an AI system for breast cancer screening. Nature. 2020;577(7788):89–94.
Google Scholar
Lotter W, et al. Robust breast cancer detection in mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis using an annotation-efficient deep learning approach. Nat Med. 2021;27(2):244–9.
Google Scholar
Shen Y, et al. Artificial intelligence system reduces false-positive findings in the interpretation of breast ultrasound exams. Nat Commun. 2021;12(1):5645.
Google Scholar
Liao J, et al. Artificial intelligence-assisted ultrasound image analysis to discriminate early breast cancer in Chinese population: a retrospective, multicentre, cohort study. EClinMed. 2023;60:102001.
Sun S, et al. Deep learning prediction of axillary lymph node status using ultrasound images. Comput Biol Med. 2022;143:105250.
Google Scholar
Sandbank J, et al. Validation and real-world clinical application of an artificial intelligence algorithm for breast cancer detection in biopsies. NPJ Breast Cancer. 2022;8(1):129.
Google Scholar
Wang Y, et al. Improved breast cancer histological grading using deep learning. Ann Oncol. 2022;33(1):89–98.
Google Scholar
Steiner DF, et al. Impact of deep learning assistance on the histopathologic review of lymph nodes for metastatic breast cancer. Am J Surg Pathol. 2018;42(12):1636–46.
Google Scholar
Challa B, et al. Artificial intelligence-aided diagnosis of breast cancer lymph node metastasis on histologic slides in a digital workflow. Mod Pathol. 2023;36(8):100216.
Google Scholar
Hwang EJ, et al. Deep learning for detection of pulmonary metastasis on chest radiographs. Radiology. 2021;301(2):455–63.
Google Scholar
Nam JG, et al. AI improves nodule detection on chest radiographs in a health screening population: a randomized controlled trial. Radiology. 2023;307(2):e221894.
Google Scholar
Ardila D, et al. End-to-end lung cancer screening with three-dimensional deep learning on low-dose chest computed tomography. Nat Med. 2019;25(6):954–61.
Google Scholar
Venkadesh KV, et al. Deep learning for malignancy risk estimation of pulmonary nodules detected at low-dose screening CT. Radiology. 2021;300(2):438–47.
Google Scholar
Wang C, et al. Data-driven risk stratification and precision management of pulmonary nodules detected on chest computed tomography. Nat Med. 2024;30(11):3184–95.
Google Scholar
Mazzone PJ, et al. Clinical validation of a cell-free DNA fragmentome assay for augmentation of lung cancer early detection. Cancer Discov. 2024;14(11):2224–42.
Google Scholar
Liang N, et al. Ultrasensitive detection of circulating tumour DNA via deep methylation sequencing aided by machine learning. Nat Biomed Eng. 2021;5(6):586–99.
Google Scholar
Coudray N, et al. Classification and mutation prediction from non–small cell lung cancer histopathology images using deep learning. Nat Med. 2018;24(10):1559–67.
Google Scholar
Mehta P, et al. AutoProstate: towards automated reporting of prostate MRI for prostate cancer assessment using deep learning. Cancers. 2021;13. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13236138.
Hamm CA, et al. Interactive explainable deep learning model informs prostate cancer diagnosis at MRI. Radiology. 2023;307(4):e222276.
Google Scholar
Saha A, et al. Artificial intelligence and radiologists in prostate cancer detection on MRI (PI-CAI): an international, paired, non-inferiority, confirmatory study. Lancet Oncol. 2024;25(7):879–87.
Google Scholar
Bulten W, et al. Artificial intelligence for diagnosis and Gleason grading of prostate cancer: the PANDA challenge. Nat Med. 2022;28(1):154–63.
Google Scholar
Bulten W, et al. Automated deep-learning system for Gleason grading of prostate cancer using biopsies: a diagnostic study. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21(2):233–41.
Google Scholar
Cho H-H, et al. Classification of the glioma grading using radiomics analysis. PeerJ. 2018;6:e5982.
Google Scholar
Park YW, et al. Robust performance of deep learning for automatic detection and segmentation of brain metastases using three-dimensional black-blood and three-dimensional gradient echo imaging. Eur Radiol. 2021;31(9):6686–95.
Google Scholar
Yan J, et al. Predicting 1p/19q co-deletion status from magnetic resonance imaging using deep learning in adult-type diffuse lower-grade gliomas: a discovery and validation study. Lab Invest. 2022;102(2):154–9.
Google Scholar
Zhou X, et al. Tumor fractions deciphered from circulating cell-free DNA methylation for cancer early diagnosis. Nat Commun. 2022;13(1):7694.
Google Scholar
Misawa M, Kudo S-E. Current status of artificial intelligence use in colonoscopy. Digestion. 2025;106(2):138–45.
Google Scholar
Chitca DD, et al. Advancing colorectal cancer diagnostics from barium enema to AI-assisted colonoscopy. Diagnostics. 2025. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics15080974.
Google Scholar
Hewett DG. Measurement of polyp size at colonoscopy: addressing human and technology bias. Dig Endosc. 2022;34(7):1478–80.
Google Scholar
Babu B, et al. A narrative review on the role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in colorectal cancer management. Cureus. 2025;17(2):e79570.
Google Scholar
Chen J, et al. Ai support for colonoscopy quality control using CNN and transformer architectures. BMC Gastroenterol. 2024;24(1):257.
Google Scholar
FDA. Available from: Cited 2025 Aug 15.
FDA. Available from: Cited 2025 Aug 15.
Wang P, et al. 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. 2020;5(4):343–51.
Google Scholar
Repici A, et al. Efficacy of real-time computer-aided detection of colorectal neoplasia in a randomized trial. Gastroenterology. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2020.04.062.
Google Scholar
Karsenti D, et al. Effect of real-time computer-aided detection of colorectal adenoma in routine colonoscopy (COLO-GENIUS): a single-centre randomised controlled trial. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2023;8(8):726–34.
Google Scholar
Shaukat A, et al. Computer-aided detection improves adenomas per colonoscopy for screening and surveillance colonoscopy: a randomized trial. Gastroenterology. 2022;163(3):732–41.
Google Scholar
Mangas-Sanjuan C, et al. Role of artificial intelligence in colonoscopy detection of advanced neoplasias: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2023;176(9):1145–52.
Google Scholar
Hassan C, et al. Real-time computer-aided detection of colorectal neoplasia during colonoscopy : a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2023;176(9):1209–20.
Google Scholar
Reynolds S. Available from: Cited 2025 Aug 15.
Yeasmin MN, et al. Advances of AI in image-based computer-aided diagnosis: a review. Array. 2024;23:100357.
Hassan C, et al. Artificial intelligence allows leaving-in-situ colorectal polyps. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cgh.2022.04.045.
Google Scholar
Rondonotti E, et al. Artificial intelligence-assisted optical diagnosis for the resect-and-discard strategy in clinical practice: the artificial intelligence BLI characterization (ABC) study. Endoscopy. 2023;55(1):14–22.
Google Scholar
Barua I, et al. Real-time artificial intelligence-based optical diagnosis of neoplastic polyps during colonoscopy. NEJM Evid. 2022;1(6):EVIDoa2200003.
Google Scholar
Li JW, et al. Real-world validation of a computer-aided diagnosis system for prediction of polyp histology in colonoscopy: a prospective multicenter study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2023;118(8):1353–64.
Google Scholar
Rex DK, et al. The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy PIVI (preservation and incorporation of valuable endoscopic innovations) on real-time endoscopic assessment of the histology of diminutive colorectal polyps. Gastrointest Endosc. 2011;73(3):419–22.
Google Scholar
Hassan C, et al. Computer-aided diagnosis for the resect-and-discard strategy for colorectal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2024;9(11):1010–9.
Google Scholar
Graham S, et al. MILD-net: Minimal information loss dilated network for gland instance segmentation in colon histology images. Med Image Anal. 2019;52:199–211.
Google Scholar
Zhao K, et al. Artificial intelligence quantified tumour-stroma ratio is an independent predictor for overall survival in resectable colorectal cancer. EBioMedicine. 2020;61:103054.
Google Scholar
Giger ML, Chan HP, Boone J. Anniversary paper: history and status of CAD and quantitative image analysis: the role of medical physics and AAPM. Med Phys. 2008;35(12):5799–820.
Google Scholar
Gao Y, et al. New frontiers: an update on computer-aided diagnosis for breast imaging in the age of artificial intelligence. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2019;212(2):300–7.
Google Scholar
Chen Y, et al. AI in breast cancer imaging: an update and future trends. Semin Nucl Med. 2025;55(3):358–70.
Google Scholar
FDA. Available from: Cited 2025 Aug 15.
FDA. Available from: Cited 2025 Aug 15.
FDA. Available from: Cited 2025 Aug 15.
Lång K, et al. Artificial intelligence-supported screen reading versus standard double reading in the Mammography Screening with Artificial Intelligence trial (MASAI): a clinical safety analysis of a randomised, controlled, non-inferiority, single-blinded, screening accuracy study. Lancet Oncol. 2023;24(8):936–44.
Google Scholar
Yala A, et al. Multi-institutional validation of a mammography-based breast cancer risk model. J Clin Oncol. 2022;40(16):1732–40.
Google Scholar
Vachon CM, et al. Impact of artificial intelligence system and volumetric density on risk prediction of interval, screen-detected, and advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2023;41(17):3172–83.
Google Scholar
Lotter W, et al. Artificial intelligence in oncology: current landscape, challenges, and future directions. Cancer Discov. 2024;14(5):711–26.
Google Scholar
Liu Y, et al. Applications of artificial intelligence in breast pathology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2023;147(9):1003–13.
Google Scholar
Zhang-Yin J, Mauel E, Talpe S. Update on sentinel lymph node methods and pathology in breast cancer. Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland). 2024. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics14030252.
Google Scholar
Paige. Available from: Cited 2025 Aug 15.
Brown JR, et al. Quantitative assessment Ki-67 score for prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. Lab Invest. 2014;94(1):98–106.
Google Scholar
Casterá C, Bernet L. HER2 immunohistochemistry inter-observer reproducibility in 205 cases of invasive breast carcinoma additionally tested by ISH. Ann Diagn Pathol. 2020;45:151451.
Google Scholar
Cai L, et al. Improving Ki67 assessment concordance by the use of an artificial intelligence-empowered microscope: a multi-institutional ring study. Histopathology. 2021;79(4):544–55.
Google Scholar
Bodén ACS, et al. The human-in-the-loop: an evaluation of pathologists’ interaction with artificial intelligence in clinical practice. Histopathology. 2021;79(2):210–8.
Google Scholar
Dy A, et al. AI improves accuracy, agreement and efficiency of pathologists for Ki67 assessments in breast cancer. Sci Rep. 2024;14(1):1283.
Google Scholar
Albuquerque DAN, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of artificial intelligence in classifying HER2 status in breast cancer immunohistochemistry. NPJ Digit Med. 2025;8(1):144.
Google Scholar
Hwang EJ, Goo JM, Park CM. AI applications for thoracic imaging: considerations for best practice. Radiology. 2025;314(2):e240650.
Google Scholar
Nam JG, et al. Development and validation of deep learning-based automatic detection algorithm for malignant pulmonary nodules on chest radiographs. Radiology. 2019;290(1):218–28.
Google Scholar
Hwang EJ, et al. Development and validation of a deep learning-based automated detection algorithm for major thoracic diseases on chest radiographs. JAMA Netw Open. 2019;2(3):e191095.
Google Scholar
Aberle DR, et al. Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(5):395–409.
Google Scholar
RadNet. Available from: Cited 2025 Aug 16.
DeepHealth. Available from: Cited 2025 Aug 16.
Qure.ai. Available from: Cited 2025 Aug 16.
Yu K-H, et al. Predicting non-small cell lung cancer prognosis by fully automated microscopic pathology image features. Nat Commun. 2016;7(1):12474.
Google Scholar
Khosravi P, et al. Deep convolutional neural networks enable discrimination of heterogeneous digital pathology images. EBioMedicine. 2018;27:317–28.
Google Scholar
Lu MY, et al. Data-efficient and weakly supervised computational pathology on whole-slide images. Nat Biomed Eng. 2021;5(6):555–70.
Google Scholar
Wang S, et al. Convpath: a software tool for lung adenocarcinoma digital pathological image analysis aided by a convolutional neural network. EBioMedicine. 2019;50:103–10.
Google Scholar
Hofman P, et al. Artificial intelligence for diagnosis and predictive biomarkers in non-small cell lung cancer patients: new promises but also new hurdles for the pathologist. Lung Cancer. 2025;200:108110.
Google Scholar
Kasivisvanathan V, et al. MRI-targeted or standard biopsy for prostate-cancer diagnosis. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(19):1767–77.
Google Scholar
Turkbey B, Haider MA. Deep learning-based artificial intelligence applications in prostate MRI: brief summary. Br J Radiol. 2022;95(1131):20210563.
Google Scholar
Winkel DJ, et al. 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. 2021;56(10):605–13.
Google Scholar
Siemens. Available from: Cited 2025 Aug 16.
Quantib. Available from: Cited 2025 Aug 16.
Cortechs.ai. Available from: Cited 2025 Aug 16.
GeHealthCare. Available from: Cited 2025 Aug 16.
Quibim. Available from: Cited 2025 Aug 16.
Campanella G, et al. Clinical-grade computational pathology using weakly supervised deep learning on whole slide images. Nat Med. 2019;25(8):1301–9.
Google Scholar
Pinckaers H, et al. Detection of prostate cancer in whole-slide images through end-to-end training with image-level labels. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2021;40(7):1817–26.
Google Scholar
Chen C-M, et al. A computer-aided diagnosis system for differentiation and delineation of malignant regions on whole-slide prostate histopathology image using spatial statistics and multidimensional densenet. Med Phys. 2020;47(3):1021–33.
Google Scholar
Raciti P, et al. Clinical validation of artificial intelligence-augmented pathology diagnosis demonstrates significant gains in diagnostic accuracy in prostate cancer detection. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2023;147(10):1178–85.
Google Scholar
da Silva LM, et al. Independent real-world application of a clinical-grade automated prostate cancer detection system. J Pathol. 2021;254(2):147–58.
Google Scholar
Perincheri S, et al. An independent assessment of an artificial intelligence system for prostate cancer detection shows strong diagnostic accuracy. Mod Pathol. 2021;34(8):1588–95.
Google Scholar
Nagpal K, et al. Development and validation of a deep learning algorithm for improving Gleason scoring of prostate cancer. NPJ Digit Med. 2019;2(1):48.
Google Scholar
Khalighi S, et al. Artificial intelligence in neuro-oncology: advances and challenges in brain tumor diagnosis, prognosis, and precision treatment. NPJ Precis Oncol. 2024;8(1):80.
Google Scholar
Musthafa N, Memon QA, Masud MM. Advancing brain tumor analysis: current trends, key challenges, and perspectives in deep learning-based brain MRI tumor diagnosis. Eng. 2025;6(5):82.
Ertosun MG, Rubin DL. Automated Grading of Gliomas using Deep Learning in Digital Pathology Images: A modular approach with ensemble of convolutional neural networks. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2015;2015:1899–1908.
Li Z, et al. Vision transformer-based weakly supervised histopathological image analysis of primary brain tumors. iScience. 2023;26(1):105872.
Google Scholar
Louis DN, et al. The 2021 WHO classification of tumors of the central nervous system: a summary. Neuro-oncol. 2021;23(8):1231–51.
Google Scholar
Bender K, et al. High-grade astrocytoma with piloid features (HGAP): the Charité experience with a new central nervous system tumor entity. J Neuro-Oncol. 2021;153(1):109–20.
Vermeulen C, et al. Ultra-fast deep-learned CNS tumour classification during surgery. Nature. 2023;622(7984):842–9.
Google Scholar
Hoang D-T, et al. Prediction of DNA methylation-based tumor types from histopathology in central nervous system tumors with deep learning. Nat Med. 2024;30(7):1952–61.
Google Scholar
Kim HS, et al. Single-incision robotic colorectal surgery with the da Vinci SP® surgical system: initial results of 50 cases. Tech Coloproctol. 2023;27(7):589–99.
Google Scholar
Picciariello A, et al. Evaluation of the da Vinci single-port system in colorectal cancer surgery: a scoping review. Update Surg. 2024;76(7):2515–20.
Di Costanzo G, et al. Artificial intelligence and radiomics in magnetic resonance imaging of rectal cancer: a review. Explor Target Antitumor Ther. 2023;4(3):406–21.
Google Scholar
Kather JN, et al. Predicting survival from colorectal cancer histology slides using deep learning: a retrospective multicenter study. PLoS Med. 2019;16(1):e1002730.
Google Scholar
Reichling C, et al. Artificial intelligence-guided tissue analysis combined with immune infiltrate assessment predicts stage III colon cancer outcomes in PETACC08 study. Gut. 2020;69(4):681–90.
Google Scholar
Wu Z, et al. Graph deep learning for the characterization of tumour microenvironments from spatial protein profiles in tissue specimens. Nat Biomed Eng. 2022;6(12):1435–48.
Google Scholar
Foersch S, et al. Multistain deep learning for prediction of prognosis and therapy response in colorectal cancer. Nat Med. 2023;29(2):430–9.
Google Scholar
Jiang X, et al. An MRI deep learning model predicts outcome in rectal cancer. Radiology. 2023;307(5):e222223.
Google Scholar
Arole V, et al. Clinical validation of Histotype Px colorectal in patients in a U.S. colon cancer cohort. J Clin Oncol. 2024;42(16_suppl):3622–3622.
DoMore. Available from: Cited 2025 Aug 16.
L’Imperio V, et al. Pathologist validation of a machine learning-derived feature for colon cancer risk stratification. JAMA Netw Open. 2023;6(3):e2254891.
Google Scholar
Skrede O-J, et al. Deep learning for prediction of colorectal cancer outcome: a discovery and validation study. Lancet. 2020;395(10221):350–60.
Google Scholar
Echle A, et al. Clinical-grade detection of microsatellite instability in colorectal tumors by deep learning. Gastroenterology. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2020.06.021.
Google Scholar
Kather JN, et al. Deep learning can predict microsatellite instability directly from histology in gastrointestinal cancer. Nat Med. 2019;25(7):1054–6.
Google Scholar
Owkin. Available from: Cited 2025 Aug 16.
Pfob A, et al. Towards patient-centered decision-making in breast cancer surgery: machine learning to predict individual patient-reported outcomes at 1-year follow-up. Ann Surg. 2023;277(1):e144–52.
Google Scholar
Kothari R, et al. Raman spectroscopy and artificial intelligence to predict the Bayesian probability of breast cancer. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):6482.
Google Scholar
Park S, et al. A deep learning model of tumor cell architecture elucidates response and resistance to CDK4/6 inhibitors. Nat Cancer. 2024;5(7):996–1009.
Google Scholar
Sammut S-J, et al. Multi-omic machine learning predictor of breast cancer therapy response. Nature. 2022;601(7894):623–9.
Google Scholar
du Ogier Terrail J, et al. Federated learning for predicting histological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in triple-negative breast cancer. Nat Med. 2023;29(1):135–46.
Amgad M, et al. A population-level digital histologic biomarker for enhanced prognosis of invasive breast cancer. Nat Med. 2024;30(1):85–97.
Google Scholar
Saltz J, et al., Spatial Organization and Molecular Correlation of Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes Using Deep Learning on Pathology Images. Cell Reports. 2018;23(1):181-193.
Binder A, et al. Morphological and molecular breast cancer profiling through explainable machine learning. Nat Mach Intell. 2021;3(4):355–66.
Shamai G, et al. Deep learning-based image analysis predicts PD-L1 status from H&E-stained histopathology images in breast cancer. Nat Commun. 2022;13(1):6753.
Google Scholar
Shamai G, et al. Artificial intelligence algorithms to assess hormonal status from tissue microarrays in patients with breast cancer. JAMA Netw Open. 2019;2(7):e197700–e197700.
Google Scholar
Assaf ZJF, et al. A longitudinal circulating tumor DNA-based model associated with survival in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. Nat Med. 2023;29(4):859–68.
Google Scholar
Widman AJ, et al. Ultrasensitive plasma-based monitoring of tumor burden using machine-learning-guided signal enrichment. Nat Med. 2024;30(6):1655–66.
Google Scholar
Heeke S, et al. Tumor- and circulating-free DNA methylation identifies clinically relevant small cell lung cancer subtypes. Cancer Cell. 2024;42(2):225-237.e5.
Google Scholar
Park S, et al. 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. 2022;40(17):1916–28.
Google Scholar
Lunit. Available from: Cited 2025 Aug 17.
Vanguri RS, et al. 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. 2022;3(10):1151–64.
Google Scholar
Wang S, et al. Mining whole-lung information by artificial intelligence for predicting EGFR genotype and targeted therapy response in lung cancer: a multicohort study. Lancet Digit Health. 2022;4(5):e309–19.
Google Scholar
Rakaee M, et al. Machine learning-based immune phenotypes correlate with STK11/KEAP1 co-mutations and prognosis in resectable NSCLC: a sub-study of the TNM-I trial. Ann Oncol. 2023;34(7):578–88.
Google Scholar
Ricciuti B, et al. Genomic and immunophenotypic landscape of acquired resistance to PD-(L)1 blockade in non–small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2024;42(11):1311–21.
Google Scholar
Khanna R, et al. Artificial intelligence in the management of prostate cancer. Nat Rev Urol. 2025;22(3):125–6.
Google Scholar
Hung AJ, et al. Utilizing machine learning and automated performance metrics to evaluate robot-assisted radical prostatectomy performance and predict outcomes. J Endourol. 2018;32(5):438–44.
Google Scholar
Checcucci E, et al. Three-dimensional automatic artificial intelligence driven augmented-reality selective biopsy during nerve-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a feasibility and accuracy study. Asian J Urol. 2023;10(4):407–15.
Google Scholar
McIntosh C, et al. Clinical integration of machine learning for curative-intent radiation treatment of patients with prostate cancer. Nat Med. 2021;27(6):999–1005.
Google Scholar
Nouranian S, et al. Learning-based multi-label segmentation of transrectal ultrasound images for prostate brachytherapy. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2016;35(3):921–32.
Google Scholar
Daskivich TJ, et al. Limitations of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network® (NCCN®) guidelines for prediction of limited life expectancy in men with prostate cancer. J Urol. 2017;197(2):356–62.
Google Scholar
Esteva A, et al. Prostate cancer therapy personalization via multi-modal deep learning on randomized phase III clinical trials. NPJ Digit Med. 2022;5(1):71.
Google Scholar
Parker CTA, et al. External validation of a digital pathology-based multimodal artificial intelligence-derived prognostic model in patients with advanced prostate cancer starting long-term androgen deprivation therapy: a post-hoc ancillary biomarker study of four phase 3 randomised controlled trials of the STAMPEDE platform protocol. Lancet Digit Health. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landig.2025.100885.
Google Scholar
Elmarakeby HA, et al. Biologically informed deep neural network for prostate cancer discovery. Nature. 2021;598(7880):348–52.
Google Scholar
Kartasalo K, et al. Detection of perineural invasion in prostate needle biopsies with deep neural networks. Virchows Arch. 2022;481(1):73–82.
Google Scholar
Spratt DE, et al. Artificial intelligence predictive model for hormone therapy use in prostate cancer. NEJM Evid. 2023;2(8):EVIDoa2300023.
Google Scholar
Le NQK, et al. XGBoost improves classification of MGMT promoter methylation status in IDH1 wildtype glioblastoma. J Pers Med. 2020;10(3):128.
Google Scholar
Do DT, et al. Improving MGMT methylation status prediction of glioblastoma through optimizing radiomics features using genetic algorithm-based machine learning approach. Sci Rep. 2022;12(1):13412.
Google Scholar
Kawahara D, et al. Predicting the local response of metastatic brain tumor to Gamma Knife radiosurgery by radiomics with a machine learning method. Front Oncol. 2020;10:569461.
Google Scholar
Peng L, et al. Distinguishing true progression from radionecrosis after stereotactic radiation therapy for brain metastases with machine learning and radiomics. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2018;102(4):1236–43.
Google Scholar
Zhang B, et al. Machine-learning based MRI radiomics models for early detection of radiation-induced brain injury in nasopharyngeal carcinoma. BMC Cancer. 2020;20(1):502.
Google Scholar
Kocher M, et al. Applications of radiomics and machine learning for radiotherapy of malignant brain tumors. Strahlenther Onkol. 2020;196(10):856–67.
Google Scholar
Macyszyn L, et al. Imaging patterns predict patient survival and molecular subtype in glioblastoma via machine learning techniques. Neuro-oncol. 2016;18(3):417–25.
Google Scholar
Zheng Y, et al. Spatial cellular architecture predicts prognosis in glioblastoma. Nat Commun. 2023;14(1):4122.
Google Scholar
Hsu E, et al. Machine learning and deep learning tools for the automated capture of cancer surveillance data. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2024;2024(65):145–51.
Google Scholar
Alawad M, et al. Automatic extraction of cancer registry reportable information from free-text pathology reports using multitask convolutional neural networks. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2020;27(1):89–98.
Google Scholar
Chandrashekar M, et al. Path-BigBird: an AI-driven transformer approach to classification of cancer pathology reports. JCO Clin Cancer Inform. 2024;8:e2300148.
Google Scholar
Placido D, et al. A deep learning algorithm to predict risk of pancreatic cancer from disease trajectories. Nat Med. 2023;29(5):1113–22.
Google Scholar
Guevara M, et al. Large language models to identify social determinants of health in electronic health records. NPJ Digit Med. 2024;7(1):6.
Google Scholar
Pan J, et al. Integrating large language models with human expertise for disease detection in electronic health records. Comput Biol Med. 2025;191:110161.
Google Scholar
Abramson J, et al. Accurate structure prediction of biomolecular interactions with AlphaFold 3. Nature. 2024;630(8016):493–500.
Google Scholar
Wang T, et al. Ab initio characterization of protein molecular dynamics with AI2BMD. Nature. 2024;635(8040):1019–27.
Google Scholar
Ren F, et al. Alphafold accelerates artificial intelligence powered drug discovery: efficient discovery of a novel CDK20 small molecule inhibitor. Chem Sci. 2023;14(6):1443–52.
Google Scholar
Zhavoronkov A, et al. Deep learning enables rapid identification of potent DDR1 kinase inhibitors. Nat Biotechnol. 2019;37(9):1038–40.
Google Scholar
Vijayan RSK, et al. Enhancing preclinical drug discovery with artificial intelligence. Drug Discov Today. 2022;27(4):967–84.
Google Scholar
Tran NL, et al. Artificial intelligence-driven new drug discovery targeting serine/threonine kinase 33 for cancer treatment. Cancer Cell Int. 2023;23(1):321.
Google Scholar
Abdel-Rehim A, et al. Scientific hypothesis generation by large language models: laboratory validation in breast cancer treatment. J R Soc Interface. 2025;22(227):20240674.
Google Scholar
De Vries M, et al. Geometric deep learning and multiple-instance learning for 3d cell-shape profiling. Cell Syst. 2025;16(3):101229.
Google Scholar
Zhao X, et al. Cancer mutations converge on a collection of protein assemblies to predict resistance to replication stress. Cancer Discov. 2024;14(3):508–23.
Google Scholar
Chaix, B., et al., When Chatbots Meet Patients: One-Year Prospective Study of Conversations Between Patients With Breast Cancer and a Chatbot. JMIR Cancer. 2019;5(1):e12856.
Tawfik, E., E. Ghallab, and A. Moustafa, A nurse versus a chatbot ‒ the effect of an empowerment program on chemotherapy-related side effects and the self-care behaviors of women living with breast Cancer: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Nurs. 2023;22(1):102.
Park S. AI chatbots and linguistic injustice. J Univ Lang. 2024;25(1):99–119.
Kataoka Y, et al. Development and early feasibility of chatbots for educating patients with lung cancer and their caregivers in Japan: mixed methods study. JMIR Cancer. 2021;7(1):e26911.
Google Scholar
Wu X, et al. reguloGPT: Harnessing GPT for Knowledge Graph Construction of Molecular Regulatory Pathways. BioRxiv : the Preprint Server For Biology. bioRxiv [Preprint]. 2024.
Ingólfsson HI, et al. Machine learning-driven multiscale modeling: bridging the scales with a next-generation simulation infrastructure. J Chem Theory Comput. 2023;19(9):2658–75.
Google Scholar
Lee M, Ahmad SF, Xu J. Regulation and function of transposable elements in cancer genomes. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2024;81(1):157.
Google Scholar
Riehl K, et al. Transposonultimate: software for transposon classification, annotation and detection. Nucleic Acids Res. 2022;50(11):e64.
Google Scholar
Wang R, et al. DeepBIO: an automated and interpretable deep-learning platform for high-throughput biological sequence prediction, functional annotation and visualization analysis. Nucleic Acids Res. 2023;51(7):3017–29.
Google Scholar
Williamson SM, Prybutok V. Balancing privacy and progress: a review of privacy challenges, systemic oversight, and patient perceptions in AI-driven healthcare. Appl Sci. 2024;14(2):675.
Google Scholar
Wang C, et al. Privacy protection in using artificial intelligence for healthcare: Chinese regulation in comparative perspective. Healthcare. 2022. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10101878.
Google Scholar
Khalid N, et al. Privacy-preserving artificial intelligence in healthcare: techniques and applications. Comput Biol Med. 2023;158:106848.
Google Scholar
Pool J, et al. A systematic analysis of failures in protecting personal health data: a scoping review. Int J Inf Manage. 2024;74:102719.
Murdoch B. Privacy and artificial intelligence: challenges for protecting health information in a new era. BMC Med Ethics. 2021;22(1):122.
Google Scholar
Panagopoulos A, et al. Incentivizing the sharing of healthcare data in the AI era. Comput Law Secur Rev. 2022;45:105670.
Li M, et al. From challenges and pitfalls to recommendations and opportunities: implementing federated learning in healthcare. Med Image Anal. 2025;101:103497.
Google Scholar
Rieke N, et al. The future of digital health with federated learning. NPJ Digit Med. 2020;3(1):119.
Google Scholar
Elbachir YM, et al. Federated Learning for Multi-institutional on 3D Brain Tumor Segmentation. in 2024 6th International Conference on Pattern Analysis and Intelligent Systems (PAIS). pages 1-8, IEEE, 2024.
Mohri M, Sivek G, Suresh AT. Agnostic federated learning. in International conference on machine learning. PMLR; 2019, pp. 4615–25.
Li T, et al. Fair resource allocation in federated learning. arXiv. 2019, arXiv:1905.10497.
Xu J, et al. Federated learning for healthcare informatics. J Healthc Inform Res. 2021;19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41666-020-00082-4.
Almanifi ORA, et al. Communication and computation efficiency in federated learning: a survey. Internet of Things. 2023;22:100742.
Singh JP, et al. Privacy-aware hierarchical federated learning in healthcare: integrating differential privacy and secure multi-party computation. Future Internet. 2025;17(8):345.
Shukla S, et al. Federated learning with differential privacy for breast cancer diagnosis enabling secure data sharing and model integrity. Sci Rep. 2025;15(1):13061.
Google Scholar
Nisevic M, Milojevic D, Spajic D. Synthetic data in medicine: legal and ethical considerations for patient profiling. Comput Struct Biotechnol J. 2025;28:190–8.
Google Scholar
Zhou Z, et al. Privacy enhancing and generalizable deep learning with synthetic data for mediastinal neoplasm diagnosis. NPJ Digit Med. 2024;7(1):293.
Google Scholar
Walonoski J, et al. Synthea: an approach, method, and software mechanism for generating synthetic patients and the synthetic electronic health care record. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2018;25(3):230–8.
Google Scholar
Li J, et al. A comprehensive survey on source-free domain adaptation. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell. 2024;46(8):5743–62.
Google Scholar
Peng D, et al. Unsupervised domain adaptation via domain-adaptive diffusion. IEEE Trans Image Process. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIP.2024.3424985.
Google Scholar
Wang H, et al. Dual-reference source-free active domain adaptation for nasopharyngeal carcinoma tumor segmentation across multiple hospitals. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2024;43(12):4078–90.
Google Scholar
Guichemerre A, et al. Source-free domain adaptation of weakly-supervised object localization models for histology. in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. arXiv. 2024, arXiv:2404.19113.
Agbo CC, Mahmoud QH, Eklund JM. Blockchain technology in healthcare: a systematic review. Healthcare (Basel). 2019. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare7020056.
Google Scholar
Pokharel BP, et al. BlockHealthSecure: integrating blockchain and cybersecurity in post-pandemic healthcare systems. Information. 2025;16(2):133.
Munjal, K. and R. Bhatia, A systematic review of homomorphic encryption and its contributions in healthcare industry. Complex Intell Systems. 2022;9(4):1–28.
Lawlor RT. The impact of GDPR on data sharing for European cancer research. Lancet Oncol. 2023;24(1):6–8.
Google Scholar
Harvey HB, Gowda V. How the FDA regulates AI. Acad Radiol. 2020;27(1):58–61.
Google Scholar
FDA. Available from: Cited 2025 Aug 12.
Venkatesh KP, Kadakia KT, Gilbert S. Learnings from the first AI-enabled skin cancer device for primary care authorized by FDA. NPJ Digit Med. 2024;7(1):156.
Google Scholar
Fehrmann RSN, van Kruchten M, de Vries EGE. How to critically appraise and direct the trajectory of AI development and application in oncology. ESMO Real World Data and Digital Oncology. 2024;5:100066.
Hovda T, et al. Retrospective evaluation of a CE-marked AI system, including 1,017,208 mammography screening examinations. Eur Radiol. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-025-11521-4.
Google Scholar
Aiforia. Available from: Cited 2025 Aug 12.
Aiosyn. Available from: Cited 2025 Aug 12.
Lvovs D, et al. Balancing ethical data sharing and open science for reproducible research in biomedical data science. Cell Rep Med. 2025;6(4):102080.
Google Scholar
Cheng C, et al. A general primer for data harmonization. Sci Data. 2024;11(1):152.
Google Scholar
Bhinder B, et al. Artificial intelligence in cancer research and precision medicine. Cancer Discov. 2021;11(4):900–15.
Google Scholar
Zavala VA, et al. Cancer health disparities in racial/ethnic minorities in the United States. Br J Cancer. 2021;124(2):315–32.
Google Scholar
Bouguettaya A, Stuart EM, Aboujaoude E. Racial bias in AI-mediated psychiatric diagnosis and treatment: a qualitative comparison of four large language models. npj Digit Med. 2025;8(1):332.
Google Scholar
Yuan J, et al. Integrated analysis of genetic ancestry and genomic alterations across cancers. Cancer Cell. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccell.2018.08.019.
Google Scholar
Spratt DE, et al. Racial/ethnic disparities in genomic sequencing. JAMA Oncol. 2016;2(8):1070–4.
Google Scholar
Ju D, et al. Importance of including non-European populations in large human genetic studies to enhance precision medicine. Annu Rev Biomed Data Sci. 2022;5:321–39.
Google Scholar
Sollis E, et al. The NHGRI-EBI GWAS catalog: knowledgebase and deposition resource. Nucleic Acids Res. 2023;51(D1):D977–85.
Google Scholar
Martin AR, et al. Clinical use of current polygenic risk scores may exacerbate health disparities. Nat Genet. 2019;51(4):584–91.
Google Scholar
Dutil J, et al. An interactive resource to probe genetic diversity and estimated ancestry in cancer cell lines. Cancer Res. 2019;79(7):1263–73.
Google Scholar
Wonkam A, Adeyemo A. Leveraging our common African origins to understand human evolution and health. Cell Genom. 2023;3(3):100278.
Google Scholar
Duda P, Jan Z. Human population history revealed by a supertree approach. Sci Rep. 2016;6(1):29890.
Google Scholar
Smith LA, et al. Equitable machine learning counteracts ancestral bias in precision medicine. Nat Commun. 2025;16(1):2144.
Google Scholar
Koçak B, et al. Bias in artificial intelligence for medical imaging: fundamentals, detection, avoidance, mitigation, challenges, ethics, and prospects. Diagn Intervent Radiol (Ankara, Turkey). 2025;31(2):75–88.
Norori N, et al. Addressing bias in big data and AI for health care: a call for open science. Patterns. 2021;2(10):100347.
Google Scholar
Pinaya WHL, et al. Brain Imaging Generation with Latent Diffusion Models. In: Deep Generative Models: Second MICCAI Workshop, DGM4MICCAI 2022, Held in Conjunction with MICCAI 2022, Singapore, September 22, 2022, Proceedings. Singapore, Singapore: Springer-Verlag; 2022. p. 117–26.
McCradden MD, et al. Ethical limitations of algorithmic fairness solutions in health care machine learning. The Lancet Digital Health. 2020;2(5):e221–3.
Google Scholar
Seyyed-Kalantari L, et al. Underdiagnosis bias of artificial intelligence algorithms applied to chest radiographs in under-served patient populations. Nat Med. 2021;27(12):2176–82.
Google Scholar
Chen RJ, et al. Algorithmic fairness in artificial intelligence for medicine and healthcare. Nat Biomed Eng. 2023;7(6):719–42.
Google Scholar
Buolamwini J, Gebru T. Gender shades: Intersectional accuracy disparities in commercial gender classification. InProceedings of the 1st Conference on Fairness, Accountability and Transparency. A.F. Sorelle and W. Christo, Editors. PMLR: Proceedings of Machine Learning Research; 2018. pp. 77–91.
Diao JA, et al. Clinical implications of removing race from estimates of kidney function. JAMA. 2021;325(2):184–6.
Google Scholar
Kamiran F, Calders T. Data preprocessing techniques for classification without discrimination. Knowl Inf Syst. 2012;33(1):1–33.
Krasanakis E, et al. Adaptive Sensitive Reweighting to Mitigate Bias in Fairness-aware Classification. In Proceedings of the 2018 World Wide Web Conference. Lyon, France: International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee; 2018. pp. 853–862.
Jiang H, Nachum O. Identifying and Correcting Label Bias in Machine Learning. Inproceedings of the Twenty Third International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics. C. Silvia and C. Roberto, Editors. PMLR: Proceedings of Machine Learning Research; 2020. pp. 702-712.
Kamishima T, et al. Fairness-aware classifier with prejudice remover regularizer. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 2012.
Zafar MB, et al. Fairness Constraints: Mechanisms for Fair Classification. InProceedings of the 20th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics. S. Aarti and Z. Jerry, Editors. PMLR: Proceedings of Machine Learning Research; 2017. pp. 962-970.
Goel N, Yaghini M, Faltings B. Non-Discriminatory Machine Learning through Convex Fairness Criteria. InProceedings of the 2018 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society. New Orleans, LA, USA: Association for Computing Machinery; 2018. p. 116.
Corbett-Davies S, et al. Algorithmic decision making and the cost of fairness. in Proceedings of the 23rd acm sigkdd international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining. arXiv. 2017, arXiv:1701.08230.
Hardt M, Price E, Srebro N, .J.A.i.n.i.p.s. Equality of opportunity in supervised learning. arXiv.2016, arXiv:1610.02413.
Corbett-Davies S, et al. The measure and mismeasure of fairness. 2023. 24(312):1-117.
Kleinberg J, Mullainathan S, Raghavan M, J.a.p.a. Inherent trade-offs in the fair determination of risk scores. arXiv. 2016, arXiv:1609.05807.
Pleiss G, et al. On fairness and calibration. arXiv. 2017, arXiv:1709.02012.
Chouldechova A. Fair prediction with disparate impact: a study of bias in recidivism prediction instruments. Big Data. 2017;5(2):153–63.
Google Scholar
Pfohl SR, Foryciarz A, Shah NH. An empirical characterization of fair machine learning for clinical risk prediction. J Biomed Inform. 2021;113:103621.
Google Scholar
Zhao H, Gordon GJ, J.J.o.M.L.R. Inherent tradeoffs in learning fair representations. arXiv.2022, arXiv:1906.08386.
Giguere S, et al. Fairness guarantees under demographic shift. InProceedings of the 10th International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR). 2022 Poster.
Subbaswamy A, Saria S. From development to deployment: dataset shift, causality, and shift-stable models in health AI. Biostatistics (Oxford, England). 2020;21(2):345–52.
Google Scholar
Guo LL, et al. Evaluation of domain generalization and adaptation on improving model robustness to temporal dataset shift in clinical medicine. Sci Rep. 2022;12(1):2726.
Google Scholar
Castro DC, Walker I, Glocker B. Causality matters in medical imaging. Nat Commun. 2020;11(1):3673.
Google Scholar
Hashimoto T, et al. Fairness without demographics in repeated loss minimization. InInternational Conference on Machine Learning. PMLR 80:1929-1938, 2018.
Wang S, et al. Robust optimization for fairness with noisy protected groups. arXiv. 2020, arXiv:2002.09343.
Duchi JC, Namkoong HJ. Learning models with uniform performance via distributionally robust optimization. Ann Stat. 2021;49(3):1378–406.
Heslin KC, et al. Trends in opioid-related inpatient stays shifted after the US transitioned to ICD-10-CM diagnosis coding in 2015. Med Care. 2017;55(11):918–23.
Google Scholar
Guo LL, et al. Systematic review of approaches to preserve machine learning performance in the presence of temporal dataset shift in clinical medicine. Appl Clin Inform. 2021;12(4):808–15.
Google Scholar
Bifet A, Gavalda R. Learning from time-changing data with adaptive windowing. In: Proc. of the 7th SIAM Int. Conf. on Data Mining, SDM (2007).
Hao M, et al. Efficient and privacy-enhanced federated learning for industrial artificial intelligence. IEEE Trans Ind Inform. 2020;16(10):6532–42.
Yang Q, et al. Federated machine learning: concept and applications. 2019. 10(2 %J ACM Trans. Intell. Syst. Technol.): p. Article 12.
Bonawitz K, et al. Practical Secure Aggregation for Privacy-Preserving Machine Learning. InProceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security. Dallas, Texas, USA: Association for Computing Machinery; 2017. pp. 1175–1191.
Rieke N, et al. The future of digital health with federated learning. NPJ Digit Med. 2020;3:119.
Google Scholar
Wang Y, et al. Intelligent fault diagnosis with deep adversarial domain adaptation. IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement. 2020;70:p. 1-9.
Bercea CI, et al. Feddis: Disentangled federated learning for unsupervised brain pathology segmentation. arXiv. 2021, arXiv:2103.03705.
Wexler, J., et al., Probing ML models for fairness with the what-if tool and SHAP: hands-on tutorial, in Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. Barcelona, Spain: Association for Computing Machinery;2020. ACM, 705.
Meng C, et al. Interpretability and fairness evaluation of deep learning models on MIMIC-IV dataset. Sci Rep. 2022;12(1):7166.
Google Scholar
Jacovi A, et al. Formalizing trust in artificial intelligence: Prerequisites, causes and goals of human trust in AI. InProceedings of the 2021 ACM conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency. 2021. p. 624 – 635.
Floridi L. Establishing the rules for building trustworthy AI. Nat Mach Intell. 2019;1(6):261–2.
Liu X, et al. Reporting guidelines for clinical trial reports for interventions involving artificial intelligence: the CONSORT-AI extension. Nat Med. 2020;26(9):1364–74.
Google Scholar
Sounderajah V, et al. Developing a reporting guideline for artificial intelligence-centred diagnostic test accuracy studies: the STARD-AI protocol. BMJ Open. 2021;11(6):e047709.
Google Scholar
Murikah W, Nthenge JK, Musyoka FM. Bias and ethics of AI systems applied in auditing – a systematic review. Sci Afr. 2024;25:e02281.
Durán JM, Pozzi G. Trust and trustworthiness in AI. Philos Technol. 2025;38(1):16.
Buiten MC. Product liability for defective AI. Eur J Law Econ. 2024;57(1):239–73.
Zhang C, et al. Novel research and future prospects of artificial intelligence in cancer diagnosis and treatment. J Hematol Oncol. 2023;16(1):114.
Google Scholar
Smith AA, Li R, Tse ZTH. Reshaping healthcare with wearable biosensors. Sci Rep. 2023;13(1):4998.
Google Scholar
Vo D-K, Trinh KTL. Advances in wearable biosensors for healthcare: current trends, applications, and future perspectives. Biosensors. 2024;14(11):560.
Google Scholar
Kashaninejad N, et al. Chapter Nine – Wearable biosensors for cancer detection and monitoring. InProgress in Molecular Biology and Translational Science. K. Mahato and A. Pandya, Editors. Academic Press; 2025. pp. 311–354.
Song B, Liang R. Integrating artificial intelligence with smartphone-based imaging for cancer detection in vivo. Biosens Bioelectron. 2025;271:116982.
Google Scholar
Hunt B, Ruiz AJ, Pogue BW. Smartphone-based imaging systems for medical applications: a critical review. J Biomed Opt. 2021;26(4):040902.
Markus AF, Kors JA, Rijnbeek PR. The role of explainability in creating trustworthy artificial intelligence for health care: a comprehensive survey of the terminology, design choices, and evaluation strategies. J Biomed Inform. 2021;113:103655.
Google Scholar
Hassija V, et al. Interpreting black-box models: a review on explainable artificial intelligence. Cogn Comput. 2024;16(1):45–74.
Altman S. Available from: Cited 2025 Aug 17.
36kr. Available from: Cited 2025 Aug 17.
McCarthy J, et al. A Proposal for the Dartmouth Summer Research Project on Artificial Intelligence, August 31, 1955. AI Mag. 2006;27(4):12.
Fradkov AL. Early history of machine learning. IFAC-PapersOnLine. 2020;53(2):1385–90.
Cortes C, Vapnik V. Support-vector networks. Mach Learn. 1995;20(3):273–97.
Quinlan JR. Induction of decision trees. Mach Learn. 1986;1(1):81–106.
Krizhevsky A, Sutskever I, Hinton GE. Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural networks. Commun ACM. 2017;60(6):84–90.
Sarker IH. Deep learning: a comprehensive overview on techniques, taxonomy, applications and research directions. SN Comput Sci. 2021;2(6):420.
Google Scholar
Vaswani A, et al. Attention is all you need. In Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems. Long Beach, California, USA: Curran Associates Inc.; 2017. pp. 6000–6010.
Sapkota R, Raza S, Karkee M. Comprehensive analysis of transparency and accessibility of chatgpt, deepseek, and other sota large language models. in Preprints. arXiv. 2025, arXiv:2502.18505.
link