View Article

  • The Rise of Predictive Oncology: Artificial Intelligence for Early Detection, Risk Modeling, and Precision Therapy

  • 1 Senior Research Scientist, Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, North Carolina, USA
    2 Consultant in Molecular Imaging, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, USA
     

Abstract

Cancer continues to represent one of the most significant global health challenges due to its molecular heterogeneity, dynamic evolution, late-stage diagnosis, and variability in therapeutic response. Conventional oncology approaches have historically relied on population-based treatment paradigms, imaging interpretation, histopathological examination, and isolated molecular biomarkers, which frequently fail to capture the biological complexity underlying tumor initiation, progression, metastasis, and therapeutic resistance. The emergence of predictive oncology has introduced a transformative computational framework that integrates artificial intelligence (AI), digital biomarkers, multi-omics analytics, radiogenomics, and real-time clinical data to enable earlier cancer detection, individualized risk prediction, and precision therapeutic intervention. Predictive oncology combines machine learning, deep learning, transformer-based architectures, and multimodal foundation models to analyze highly heterogeneous datasets generated from radiology, histopathology, genomics, transcriptomics, proteomics, liquid biopsy profiling, wearable devices, and electronic health records. These computational systems are increasingly capable of identifying latent disease signatures, forecasting tumor behavior, predicting treatment response, and optimizing personalized clinical decision-making. Recent advances in AI-driven oncology have demonstrated remarkable improvements in cancer screening, recurrence prediction, survival estimation, digital pathology, immunotherapy response assessment, and adaptive therapeutic planning. Convolutional neural networks and transformer architectures have enabled automated interpretation of medical imaging and histopathological slides with performance approaching expert-level diagnostic accuracy. Simultaneously, multimodal AI systems integrating molecular and clinical datasets have facilitated the development of predictive biomarkers capable of guiding precision medicine strategies across multiple cancer types. Despite these advancements, substantial challenges remain regarding model interpretability, algorithmic bias, data standardization, privacy preservation, regulatory approval, and large-scale clinical implementation. This review comprehensively discusses the rise of predictive oncology and the evolving role of artificial intelligence in early cancer detection, digital biomarker discovery, risk modeling, and precision therapy. The article further highlights emerging computational architectures, multimodal learning systems, explainable AI frameworks, federated oncology networks, and future translational directions that may redefine the next generation of precision oncology.

Keywords

Predictive oncology; artificial intelligence; digital biomarkers; precision oncology; multimodal learning; risk modeling; precision therapy

Introduction

× Popup Image

Cancer remains one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide, accounting for millions of deaths annually and imposing a substantial socioeconomic burden on healthcare systems. Despite remarkable progress in molecular oncology, immunotherapy, targeted therapeutics, and precision medicine, a major proportion of malignancies continue to be diagnosed at advanced stages when therapeutic intervention becomes significantly less effective. Tumor heterogeneity, clonal evolution, genomic instability, and dynamic tumor microenvironment interactions further complicate early diagnosis and individualized treatment selection. Conventional oncology approaches are frequently constrained by delayed symptom presentation, interobserver variability in imaging and histopathological interpretation, fragmented molecular profiling, and limited integration of longitudinal patient-specific data. These limitations have accelerated the development of predictive oncology, an emerging computational discipline focused on forecasting cancer initiation, progression, recurrence, therapeutic response, and survival outcomes through advanced artificial intelligence-driven analytical systems [1–3].

Predictive oncology represents a convergence of computational biology, digital medicine, artificial intelligence, systems oncology, and precision therapeutics. Unlike traditional reactive oncology models that primarily focus on disease treatment following clinical diagnosis, predictive oncology aims to identify high-risk individuals, detect subclinical disease, characterize molecular evolution, and personalize therapeutic interventions before irreversible disease progression occurs. This paradigm shift has been facilitated by the rapid expansion of large-scale biomedical datasets generated from radiological imaging, whole-slide pathology, next-generation sequencing, transcriptomics, proteomics, metabolomics, liquid biopsy technologies, wearable sensors, and electronic health records. The integration of these multidimensional datasets through machine learning and deep learning frameworks has enabled the identification of hidden biological patterns that are often undetectable using conventional statistical approaches [4–6].

Artificial intelligence has emerged as the computational backbone of predictive oncology because of its ability to process highly heterogeneous and high-dimensional biomedical data at unprecedented speed and scale. Machine learning algorithms can recognize nonlinear relationships between molecular alterations and clinical outcomes, whereas deep neural networks can automatically extract hierarchical feature representations from imaging and molecular datasets without manual feature engineering. Convolutional neural networks have demonstrated exceptional capability in radiological and histopathological image interpretation, while transformer-based architectures and multimodal foundation models have enabled simultaneous integration of genomic, transcriptomic, imaging, and clinical data streams. These systems increasingly support the development of predictive biomarkers capable of forecasting cancer susceptibility, recurrence probability, therapeutic sensitivity, and overall patient survival [7–10].

One of the most transformative aspects of predictive oncology is the emergence of digital biomarkers. Digital biomarkers refer to quantifiable physiological, imaging, molecular, behavioral, or clinical parameters collected through digital technologies and computational systems that can predict disease risk, therapeutic response, or clinical progression. In oncology, digital biomarkers are derived from radiological scans, histopathological images, circulating tumor DNA, wearable biosensors, mobile health applications, and longitudinal electronic medical records. AI-enabled analysis of these biomarkers has improved the sensitivity and specificity of early cancer detection strategies while simultaneously enabling dynamic disease monitoring and adaptive therapeutic planning [11–13]. The integration of radiogenomics, computational pathology, liquid biopsy analytics, and multimodal predictive modeling has significantly enhanced precision oncology frameworks across breast cancer, lung cancer, colorectal cancer, glioblastoma, melanoma, and hematological malignancies.

Recent progress in predictive oncology has also been driven by advances in self-supervised learning, multimodal representation learning, and large-scale foundation models. These architectures are capable of learning generalized representations from unlabeled biomedical datasets and subsequently transferring acquired knowledge across multiple downstream oncology tasks. Foundation models trained on histopathological slides, radiological imaging, genomic datasets, and clinical narratives have demonstrated improved generalizability and predictive performance compared with traditional task-specific machine learning systems. Simultaneously, large language models are increasingly being explored for clinical documentation analysis, trial matching, therapeutic recommendation systems, and oncology decision-support platforms [14–16]. Such developments are rapidly reshaping the computational infrastructure of modern oncology.

Although predictive oncology offers extraordinary opportunities for transforming cancer medicine, substantial scientific and clinical challenges remain unresolved. Algorithmic bias, insufficient dataset diversity, limited interpretability of black-box models, regulatory uncertainty, privacy concerns, and integration barriers within clinical workflows continue to hinder large-scale implementation. Furthermore, many predictive models demonstrate strong retrospective performance but limited external validation across diverse patient populations and healthcare systems. Ensuring fairness, transparency, reproducibility, and clinical reliability therefore remains essential for successful translation of predictive oncology systems into routine clinical practice [17–19].

This review critically examines the rise of predictive oncology and the expanding role of artificial intelligence in early cancer detection, digital biomarker discovery, risk modeling, and precision therapy. Particular emphasis is placed on computational architectures, multimodal AI systems, explainable oncology frameworks, federated learning strategies, and future translational directions that may redefine the next generation of precision cancer medicine.

2. Evolution of Artificial Intelligence in Oncology

The integration of artificial intelligence into oncology has evolved through multiple technological phases characterized by progressive improvements in computational power, data availability, algorithmic sophistication, and biomedical digitization. Early computational oncology systems were primarily based on rule-based algorithms and classical statistical models that relied heavily on handcrafted clinical variables and manually engineered imaging features. These systems demonstrated limited scalability because they could not adequately capture the multidimensional biological complexity associated with tumor heterogeneity, metastatic evolution, and treatment resistance. Nevertheless, they established the conceptual foundation for computational cancer prediction and automated clinical decision-support systems [20,21].

The emergence of machine learning significantly transformed oncology research by enabling data-driven prediction models capable of identifying nonlinear relationships within high-dimensional biomedical datasets. Supervised learning algorithms including support vector machines, random forests, logistic regression systems, and gradient boosting frameworks were increasingly applied for cancer classification, prognostic estimation, and therapeutic response prediction. These approaches facilitated the integration of genomic and transcriptomic data into oncology research and contributed to early precision medicine initiatives. However, traditional machine learning systems still depended on feature engineering processes requiring domain-specific expertise and often demonstrated limited generalizability across heterogeneous datasets [22,23].

The transition from conventional machine learning to deep learning represented a major milestone in predictive oncology. Deep neural networks introduced hierarchical representation learning capabilities that enabled automated extraction of complex features directly from raw biomedical data. Convolutional neural networks rapidly became dominant in radiology and digital pathology because of their exceptional performance in image classification, segmentation, and pattern recognition. CNN-based systems demonstrated the ability to identify malignant lesions, classify tumor subtypes, quantify tumor burden, and detect microscopic histopathological features with diagnostic accuracy comparable to experienced clinicians in selected oncology applications [24–26].

Simultaneously, advances in computational pathology enabled digitization of whole-slide histopathological images, creating vast repositories of high-resolution tumor imaging data. AI systems trained on these datasets demonstrated remarkable capacity for automated tumor grading, molecular subtype prediction, immune microenvironment characterization, and survival estimation. Deep learning algorithms were increasingly capable of inferring molecular and genomic signatures directly from histopathological morphology, thereby linking tissue architecture with underlying biological pathways. This convergence of pathology and AI significantly accelerated the development of predictive digital biomarkers [27,28].

The recent emergence of transformer architectures and multimodal foundation models has further expanded the capabilities of predictive oncology. Transformers utilize self-attention mechanisms that enable simultaneous contextual analysis of highly complex biomedical information across multiple modalities. Unlike convolutional architectures that primarily process local spatial features, transformer-based models can capture long-range relationships between imaging regions, genomic interactions, and longitudinal clinical events. These systems are increasingly being used in radiogenomics, multimodal cancer prediction, and integrated therapeutic response modeling [29,30].

Foundation models represent another transformative development in oncology AI. These large-scale pretrained architectures are trained on massive unlabeled biomedical datasets using self-supervised learning objectives. Once pretrained, foundation models can be fine-tuned for diverse downstream oncology tasks including tumor classification, molecular prediction, survival analysis, immunotherapy response assessment, and treatment recommendation. Such systems demonstrate improved adaptability, scalability, and generalization compared with traditional task-specific models. Large language models are also beginning to influence oncology workflows through automated literature synthesis, clinical note interpretation, patient stratification, and trial eligibility screening [31–33].

Clinical translation of AI in oncology has accelerated substantially during the past decade due to increasing regulatory approvals, integration of AI-enabled imaging systems, and expansion of precision oncology initiatives. AI-assisted mammography, lung nodule detection, colorectal cancer screening, and digital pathology platforms are increasingly being incorporated into clinical workflows across academic and community healthcare settings. Furthermore, multimodal AI systems integrating imaging, pathology, genomics, and electronic health records are supporting risk prediction, therapeutic optimization, and real-time disease monitoring. Despite these advancements, the evolution of predictive oncology continues to depend on improvements in model interpretability, dataset diversity, prospective validation, and integration with human clinical expertise.

Table 1. Major AI-Driven Digital Biomarkers Used in Predictive Oncology

Biomarker Type

Source of Data

AI Method Used

Clinical Application

Advantages

Limitations

Radiomic biomarkers

CT, MRI, PET imaging

CNNs, radiomics-based deep learning

Early tumor detection and staging

Non-invasive assessment

Imaging variability

Histopathological biomarkers

Whole-slide pathology images

Deep CNNs, transformers

Tumor grading and subtype prediction

High morphological resolution

Large annotation requirements

Genomic biomarkers

Next-generation sequencing

Machine learning classifiers

Mutation prediction and risk assessment

Molecular precision

High-dimensional complexity

Transcriptomic biomarkers

RNA sequencing

Deep neural networks

Therapeutic response prediction

Dynamic biological insight

Data standardization challenges

Liquid biopsy biomarkers

ctDNA, circulating tumor cells

AI-based signal analysis

Minimal residual disease detection

Minimally invasive monitoring

Low biomarker abundance

Wearable-derived biomarkers

Physiological sensors

Predictive machine learning

Remote symptom and toxicity monitoring

Continuous real-time assessment

Sensor reliability issues

3. Predictive Oncology and Digital Biomarkers

Predictive oncology refers to the application of computational models, digital biomarkers, and artificial intelligence systems to anticipate cancer development, progression, recurrence, therapeutic response, and patient survival outcomes before overt clinical deterioration occurs. Unlike conventional oncology frameworks that primarily emphasize diagnosis and treatment following symptomatic presentation, predictive oncology aims to forecast disease trajectories and enable earlier intervention through continuous analysis of multidimensional biomedical data. This emerging paradigm integrates genomics, radiology, pathology, liquid biopsy profiling, wearable biosensors, and longitudinal clinical information into unified AI-driven analytical frameworks capable of generating individualized predictive insights [34–36].

Digital biomarkers have become central components of predictive oncology because they enable quantification of biological and physiological processes through computationally analyzable data streams. In oncology, digital biomarkers may include radiomic features extracted from CT or MRI scans, histomorphological patterns identified in whole-slide pathology images, genomic and transcriptomic signatures derived from sequencing technologies, and dynamic physiological indicators collected through wearable sensors. AI systems can identify latent patterns within these heterogeneous datasets and correlate them with cancer susceptibility, metastatic potential, therapeutic response, and recurrence risk. These computational capabilities have substantially improved sensitivity and specificity in early cancer detection while simultaneously supporting longitudinal disease monitoring and adaptive treatment planning [37,38].

Molecular biomarkers remain among the most influential components of predictive oncology because tumorigenesis is fundamentally driven by genomic instability, epigenetic alterations, and dysregulated signaling pathways. Next-generation sequencing technologies have enabled large-scale characterization of tumor genomes, transcriptomes, and epigenetic landscapes. Machine learning algorithms applied to these datasets can identify mutation signatures, oncogenic pathway activation patterns, and molecular predictors of therapeutic sensitivity. AI-enabled genomic analysis has become particularly valuable in lung cancer, breast cancer, colorectal carcinoma, and hematological malignancies where molecular heterogeneity significantly influences treatment outcomes [39,40].

Liquid biopsy technologies have further transformed predictive oncology by enabling minimally invasive assessment of circulating tumor DNA, circulating tumor cells, extracellular vesicles, and tumor-associated proteins. AI-driven signal processing systems are increasingly capable of detecting low-frequency tumor-derived molecular signatures within complex biological fluids. Such approaches facilitate earlier detection of minimal residual disease, recurrence prediction, and real-time therapeutic monitoring. Integration of liquid biopsy analytics with radiological and clinical data has significantly improved precision risk stratification and disease surveillance frameworks [41,42].

Wearable devices and remote monitoring systems have also emerged as important contributors to predictive oncology. Physiological parameters including heart rate variability, physical activity, sleep patterns, oxygen saturation, and treatment-related symptom burden can now be continuously monitored through digital health platforms. Machine learning systems analyzing these data streams may identify early physiological changes associated with treatment toxicity, cancer progression, or declining patient performance status. Continuous real-world monitoring therefore enables dynamic adaptation of therapeutic strategies and improved patient-centered oncology care [43].

Radiomics and computational pathology represent additional pillars of predictive digital biomarker discovery. Radiomics involves extraction of quantitative imaging features from radiological scans that may reflect tumor heterogeneity, vascularity, metabolism, and microenvironmental characteristics. Deep learning systems can analyze these features to predict tumor aggressiveness, treatment response, and survival outcomes. Similarly, computational pathology utilizes AI algorithms to analyze whole-slide histopathological images for automated tumor detection, grading, molecular subtype inference, and immune microenvironment characterization. These approaches have significantly expanded the predictive power of digital pathology beyond conventional microscopic interpretation [44,45].

The convergence of multimodal digital biomarkers is increasingly redefining precision oncology. Integrating imaging, molecular, clinical, and physiological datasets through transformer-based multimodal learning systems allows AI models to generate more comprehensive and biologically informed predictions. Such architectures may ultimately facilitate truly personalized oncology by enabling earlier intervention, individualized therapeutic selection, and continuous adaptive disease management.

4. Artificial Intelligence Architectures in Predictive Oncology

The success of predictive oncology depends heavily on advances in artificial intelligence architectures capable of processing highly heterogeneous biomedical datasets. Traditional statistical approaches are often insufficient for modeling the complex nonlinear interactions that characterize tumor evolution, molecular heterogeneity, and treatment resistance. Consequently, modern predictive oncology increasingly relies on machine learning, deep learning, transformer architectures, and multimodal foundation models to extract meaningful predictive information from imaging, molecular, and clinical data [46,47].

Machine learning algorithms remain widely used in predictive oncology because of their ability to identify relationships between clinical variables and disease outcomes. Support vector machines, random forests, gradient boosting methods, and ensemble learning systems have demonstrated effectiveness in cancer classification, recurrence prediction, and survival estimation. These models are particularly valuable for structured datasets such as genomic profiles and clinical records. However, their performance is frequently constrained by feature engineering requirements and limited scalability when analyzing extremely high-dimensional biomedical information [48].

Deep learning has dramatically expanded predictive oncology capabilities by enabling automated hierarchical feature extraction directly from raw biomedical datasets. Artificial neural networks containing multiple hidden layers can learn increasingly complex biological representations associated with tumor morphology, molecular signaling, and therapeutic response. Convolutional neural networks have become especially important in radiology and digital pathology because they can recognize subtle spatial features within medical images that may not be readily identifiable by human observers [49].

CNN-based systems are now widely used for tumor segmentation, lesion detection, metastatic assessment, and automated pathology classification. In breast imaging, AI-driven mammographic analysis has improved early detection of malignant lesions while reducing false-positive rates. In thoracic oncology, deep learning algorithms analyzing low-dose CT scans have demonstrated improved sensitivity for pulmonary nodule detection and lung cancer risk prediction. Similarly, computational pathology systems utilizing CNNs can classify tumor subtypes, quantify immune infiltration, and infer molecular characteristics directly from histopathological morphology [50,51].

Transformer architectures have recently emerged as powerful alternatives to conventional convolutional models. Transformers utilize self-attention mechanisms that enable contextual analysis of long-range relationships within biomedical datasets. Unlike CNNs that focus primarily on local spatial features, transformers can integrate information across multiple imaging regions, genomic interactions, and longitudinal clinical events simultaneously. Vision transformers and multimodal transformers are increasingly being applied in radiogenomics, digital pathology, and integrated cancer prediction systems [52].

Large language models and foundation models represent another major evolution in predictive oncology. Foundation models are pretrained on extensive biomedical datasets using self-supervised learning techniques and can subsequently be adapted to multiple downstream tasks. Such architectures demonstrate strong generalization capabilities because they learn broad biological representations rather than narrowly task-specific patterns. In oncology, foundation models are increasingly used for multimodal data integration, therapeutic prediction, clinical documentation analysis, and biomarker discovery [53,54].

Self-supervised learning has become especially important because many oncology datasets lack large-scale expert annotation. Self-supervised systems learn meaningful representations from unlabeled data by solving surrogate prediction tasks during pretraining. This approach substantially reduces annotation dependency while improving model scalability and transferability. Multimodal learning frameworks further enhance predictive accuracy by simultaneously integrating radiological imaging, pathology, genomics, transcriptomics, and electronic health records into unified predictive systems [55].

Despite remarkable progress, major computational challenges remain. Deep learning systems often require extremely large datasets, substantial computational infrastructure, and extensive external validation. Model interpretability also remains limited in many applications, creating barriers to clinical trust and regulatory approval. Nevertheless, continuous advances in computational oncology architectures are rapidly accelerating the transition toward AI-driven predictive precision medicine.

5. AI for Early Cancer Detection and Risk Modeling

Early detection remains one of the most critical determinants of cancer survival because prognosis deteriorates significantly following metastatic dissemination and advanced-stage progression. Artificial intelligence has substantially improved early cancer detection by enabling automated interpretation of radiological, histopathological, molecular, and clinical datasets with high sensitivity and specificity. Predictive oncology systems are increasingly capable of identifying subtle disease-associated patterns that may precede overt clinical symptoms or radiologically visible tumor progression [56].

Radiology has become one of the most clinically mature applications of AI-driven predictive oncology. Deep learning systems analyzing mammography, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, positron emission tomography, and ultrasound images can detect minute structural abnormalities associated with malignant transformation. In breast oncology, AI-assisted mammographic interpretation has demonstrated improved detection sensitivity while simultaneously reducing unnecessary biopsies and false-positive findings. Similar advances have been observed in lung cancer screening programs utilizing low-dose CT imaging, where deep learning systems can identify pulmonary nodules and estimate malignancy risk with substantial accuracy [57].

AI has also transformed digital pathology by enabling automated interpretation of whole-slide histopathological images. Computational pathology systems can identify malignant cellular architecture, quantify mitotic activity, assess immune infiltration, and classify molecular subtypes directly from tissue morphology. These capabilities have improved diagnostic consistency while simultaneously expanding the predictive value of histopathological analysis. AI-driven pathology systems are increasingly capable of inferring genomic alterations, microsatellite instability status, and immunotherapy responsiveness directly from digitized pathology slides [58].

Multi-omics integration represents another major advancement in predictive oncology. Cancer development involves highly interconnected genomic, transcriptomic, proteomic, and metabolic alterations that cannot be fully understood through isolated biomarker analysis. AI systems integrating multi-omics datasets can identify hidden molecular interactions associated with tumor progression, metastatic potential, and therapeutic resistance. Such approaches are particularly valuable for precision risk stratification and individualized therapeutic planning [59].

Predictive risk modeling is increasingly used to estimate cancer susceptibility, recurrence probability, and survival outcomes. Machine learning systems integrating demographic variables, family history, molecular biomarkers, imaging findings, and lifestyle factors can identify high-risk populations requiring intensified screening or preventive intervention. In hereditary cancer syndromes, AI-enabled genomic analysis has improved identification of pathogenic variants associated with increased cancer susceptibility. Similarly, predictive models evaluating postoperative recurrence risk are increasingly supporting adjuvant therapy decisions and long-term surveillance planning [60].

Population-level risk stratification is another emerging application of predictive oncology. AI systems analyzing large-scale healthcare databases and electronic health records can identify epidemiological trends, screening disparities, and high-risk demographic subgroups. Such approaches may facilitate development of personalized screening programs and resource allocation strategies within public health oncology frameworks.

The integration of imaging, pathology, genomics, and longitudinal clinical information through multimodal AI architectures is progressively redefining early cancer detection. These systems may ultimately enable continuous predictive monitoring capable of identifying cancer development before clinical symptom manifestation. However, widespread implementation requires careful validation, regulatory oversight, and integration with clinician expertise to ensure safe and equitable deployment.

Table 2. Recent Artificial Intelligence Models Applied in Predictive Oncology

AI Model/ Architecture

Oncology Modality

Clinical Application

Strengths

Limitations

Translational Relevance

Convolutional neural networks

Radiology and pathology

Tumor detection and classification

High imaging accuracy

Requires large datasets

Widely implemented clinically

Vision transformers

Histopathology and imaging

Multimodal feature analysis

Long-range contextual learning

Computationally intensive

Emerging clinical utility

Random forest models

Genomics and clinical data

Risk prediction

Interpretable structure

Limited scalability

Useful in structured datasets

Foundation models

Multi-omics oncology

Integrated predictive modeling

Strong generalization

Limited interpretability

High future potential

Large language models

Clinical oncology records

Decision support and documentation

Natural language understanding

Hallucination risk

Expanding translational use

Federated learning systems

Multi-institutional datasets

Privacy-preserving prediction

Distributed learning capability

Infrastructure complexity

Important for global oncology

6. AI in Precision Therapy and Personalized Oncology

Precision oncology aims to tailor therapeutic interventions according to individual tumor biology, molecular alterations, and patient-specific clinical characteristics. Artificial intelligence has become increasingly central to this objective because of its ability to integrate multidimensional datasets and generate personalized therapeutic predictions. Conventional oncology treatment paradigms frequently rely on population-level clinical trial data, which may not adequately capture interpatient heterogeneity or dynamic tumor evolution. AI-driven precision oncology systems instead attempt to forecast therapeutic sensitivity, resistance mechanisms, and disease progression trajectories at the individual patient level.

One of the most significant applications of AI in precision therapy involves prediction of drug response. Machine learning algorithms analyzing genomic alterations, transcriptomic signatures, proteomic pathways, and pharmacological data can identify molecular determinants associated with therapeutic sensitivity or resistance. Such systems are increasingly used to prioritize targeted therapies, optimize immunotherapy selection, and guide combination treatment strategies. In breast cancer, lung cancer, melanoma, and colorectal carcinoma, AI-driven molecular profiling has substantially improved biomarker-guided therapeutic decision-making.

Immuno-oncology represents another rapidly evolving area of predictive precision medicine. Response to immune checkpoint inhibitors varies substantially among patients due to differences in tumor mutational burden, immune microenvironment composition, neoantigen presentation, and inflammatory signaling pathways. AI systems integrating histopathology, genomics, transcriptomics, and radiological features can predict immunotherapy responsiveness more effectively than single biomarker approaches. Computational characterization of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and spatial immune organization has also improved understanding of antitumor immune dynamics.

Adaptive oncology strategies are increasingly supported by real-time AI-driven disease monitoring systems. Longitudinal analysis of radiological imaging, liquid biopsy profiles, wearable biomarker data, and clinical outcomes allows predictive models to identify emerging therapeutic resistance and disease progression before overt clinical deterioration occurs. Such approaches may facilitate dynamic treatment adjustment and optimization of therapeutic sequencing.

AI-enabled clinical decision-support systems are also becoming important components of precision oncology workflows. These platforms can synthesize molecular findings, imaging data, treatment guidelines, and clinical trial information to generate evidence-based therapeutic recommendations. Large language models may further enhance oncology decision support through automated interpretation of clinical notes, literature synthesis, and trial eligibility assessment.

Despite major advances, substantial challenges remain regarding reproducibility, dataset diversity, prospective validation, and clinical trust. Therapeutic prediction models must demonstrate robust performance across diverse patient populations and healthcare systems before widespread implementation can occur. Human oversight therefore remains essential to ensure safe and ethical integration of AI into oncology decision-making.

7. Explainable and Ethical AI in Oncology

Although artificial intelligence has demonstrated remarkable predictive capability in oncology, the increasing complexity of deep learning systems has raised substantial concerns regarding interpretability, transparency, fairness, and clinical accountability. Many AI architectures function as black-box systems in which internal decision-making processes are difficult to understand or explain. This limitation creates significant barriers to clinician trust, regulatory approval, and ethical implementation within high-stakes medical environments.

Explainable AI seeks to improve transparency by identifying the biological, radiological, or histopathological features contributing to model predictions. Visualization techniques including saliency maps, attention heatmaps, and feature attribution systems are increasingly used to highlight regions of interest influencing AI-driven diagnostic or prognostic outputs. Such methods may improve clinician confidence and facilitate integration of AI systems into routine oncology workflows.

Algorithmic bias represents another major challenge in predictive oncology. Many AI systems are trained using datasets derived predominantly from specific demographic or geographic populations, potentially limiting generalizability across underrepresented patient groups. Biased training datasets may contribute to disparities in diagnostic accuracy, risk prediction, and therapeutic recommendations. Ensuring equitable model performance therefore requires diverse training cohorts, external validation, and continuous fairness monitoring.

Ethical concerns regarding privacy, consent, data ownership, and clinical responsibility are also increasingly important. Predictive oncology systems often rely on highly sensitive genomic and clinical information requiring rigorous data protection frameworks. Furthermore, uncertainty remains regarding accountability when AI-generated recommendations influence therapeutic decision-making. Regulatory agencies and healthcare institutions must therefore establish transparent governance frameworks supporting safe and responsible implementation of AI-driven oncology systems.

8. Federated Learning and Privacy-Preserving Predictive Oncology

Large-scale predictive oncology systems require extensive multidimensional datasets to achieve robust performance and generalizability. However, centralized aggregation of genomic, imaging, and clinical information creates substantial privacy, regulatory, and cybersecurity concerns. Federated learning has emerged as an important computational strategy enabling collaborative AI training across multiple institutions without direct data sharing.

In federated learning frameworks, predictive models are trained locally within individual institutions while only model parameters or gradients are exchanged centrally. This approach preserves patient privacy while simultaneously enabling large-scale multicenter learning. Federated oncology systems have demonstrated promising performance in radiology, pathology, and genomic prediction tasks while maintaining compliance with privacy regulations.

Privacy-preserving AI strategies including differential privacy, secure multiparty computation, and homomorphic encryption are also increasingly integrated into predictive oncology frameworks. These methods may facilitate international collaboration and development of globally representative oncology models while minimizing risk of sensitive data exposure.

Despite these advantages, federated oncology systems remain technically complex and require substantial computational infrastructure, standardized data harmonization, and coordinated institutional collaboration. Ensuring interoperability and reproducibility therefore remains essential for successful global implementation.

9. Future Perspectives

The future of predictive oncology will likely be shaped by increasingly sophisticated multimodal AI systems capable of continuously integrating radiological imaging, pathology, genomics, transcriptomics, wearable biomarker streams, and real-world clinical outcomes into unified predictive frameworks. Such systems may enable earlier cancer detection, individualized prevention strategies, adaptive therapeutic optimization, and longitudinal disease forecasting.

Digital twins represent one of the most promising future directions in precision oncology. These computational models attempt to create dynamic virtual representations of individual patients by integrating molecular, physiological, imaging, and clinical data. AI-driven digital twins may eventually simulate tumor evolution, therapeutic response, and toxicity profiles before clinical intervention occurs, thereby supporting highly personalized treatment planning.

Foundation models and multimodal transformers are also expected to play increasingly central roles in predictive oncology. Their ability to learn generalized biological representations from large-scale biomedical datasets may substantially improve scalability and transferability across diverse oncology tasks. Simultaneously, integration of real-world evidence and longitudinal healthcare data may facilitate development of continuously learning oncology systems capable of adapting to evolving clinical environments.

Human-AI collaboration will remain essential despite increasing computational sophistication. Rather than replacing clinicians, predictive oncology systems are likely to augment human expertise by improving diagnostic consistency, accelerating data interpretation, and supporting evidence-based therapeutic decision-making. Ensuring ethical oversight, transparency, and equitable access will therefore remain critical as AI-driven oncology becomes progressively integrated into global healthcare systems.

CONCLUSION

Predictive oncology represents a transformative evolution in cancer medicine driven by rapid advances in artificial intelligence, digital biomarkers, multimodal analytics, and precision therapeutics. AI-driven computational systems are increasingly capable of integrating radiological imaging, histopathology, genomics, transcriptomics, liquid biopsy profiling, wearable physiological monitoring, and longitudinal clinical records into unified predictive frameworks that support earlier cancer detection, individualized risk assessment, therapeutic optimization, and adaptive disease management.

Convolutional neural networks, transformer architectures, multimodal learning systems, and foundation models have significantly expanded the analytical capabilities of modern oncology. These systems have demonstrated remarkable performance in radiological interpretation, computational pathology, molecular prediction, immunotherapy response assessment, and recurrence forecasting. Simultaneously, AI-enabled digital biomarkers are redefining precision oncology by enabling dynamic real-time monitoring and biologically informed therapeutic decision-making.

Despite these advances, important challenges remain regarding interpretability, algorithmic bias, privacy protection, prospective validation, and equitable clinical implementation. Successful translation of predictive oncology into routine practice will require rigorous external validation, transparent regulatory frameworks, standardized data harmonization, and close collaboration between computational scientists, oncologists, pathologists, radiologists, and healthcare policymakers.

Future predictive oncology systems will likely integrate multimodal foundation models, digital twins, federated learning frameworks, and continuously adaptive AI architectures capable of forecasting disease trajectories and optimizing personalized interventions at unprecedented precision. As these technologies continue to evolve, predictive oncology may fundamentally redefine the future of cancer prevention, diagnosis, and treatment while advancing the broader vision of truly individualized precision medicine.

REFERENCES

  1. Hanahan D. Hallmarks of cancer: new dimensions. Cancer Discov. 2022;12(1):31–46. doi:10.1158/2159-8290.CD-21-1059.
  2. Rajendran LKK. Machine Learning–Driven Symptom-Based Cancer Risk Stratification:A Systematic Review of Clinical Prediction Models and Methodological Rigor. Int J Drug Deliv Technol. 2026;16(40s):242-253.Doi:10.25258/ijddt.16.40s.26.
  3. Topol EJ. High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence. Nat Med. 2019;25(1):44–56. doi:10.1038/s41591-018-0300-7.
  4. Rajendran LKK. Interpretable Machine Learning for Early Mortality Prediction in Acute Myeloid Leukemia: A Decision Tree–Based Retrospective Cohort Study. Int J Drug Deliv Technol. 2026;16(40s):231-241.Doi:10.25258/ijddt.16.40s.25.
  5. Esteva A, Robicquet A, Ramsundar B, et al. A guide to deep learning in healthcare. Nat Med. 2019;25(1):24–29. doi:10.1038/s41591-018-0316-z.
  6. Rajendran LKK. Integrated Prognostic Modeling of Tumor Stage, Multimodal Therapy, and Functional Status in Lung Cancer Survival: A Real-World Cohort Study. Scientific Culture. 2026;12(5):567-576. Doi:10.5281/zenodo.1250046.
  7. Bommasani R, Hudson DA, Adeli E, et al. On the opportunities and risks of foundation models. arXiv. 2021. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2108.07258.
  8. Rajendran LKK. Integrative Pharmacogenomic Analysis of Drug Response Heterogeneity Across Cancer Cell Lines: Insights From Large-Scale GDSC Data. Scientific Culture. 2026;12(4):7537-7546. Doi:10.5281/zenodo.12426762.
  9. Acs B, Rantalainen M, Hartman J. Artificial intelligence as the next step towards precision pathology. J Intern Med. 2020;288(1):62–81. doi:10.1111/joim.13030.
  10. Rajendran LKK. Evaluating the Association of Cancer-Related Risk Factors With Multisystem Health: Insights Into Fertility, Cardiovascular, and Renal Indicators. Scientific Culture. 2026;12(4):7520-7527.Doi:10.5281/zenodo.12426760.
  11. Rajendran LKK. From Prediction to Precision: An Externally Validated Deep Learning–Based Survival and Adjuvant Therapy Recommendation System for Resected Stage III Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer. Int J Drug Deliv Technol. 2026;16(30s):430-438.doi:10.25258/ijddt.16.30s.41.
  12. Chen RJ, Lu MY, Wang J, et al. Pathomic fusion: an integrated framework for fusing histopathology and genomic features for cancer diagnosis and prognosis. Nat Mach Intell. 2022;4:179–193. doi:10.1038/s42256-022-00466-x.
  13. Rajendran LKK. From Prediction to Practice: A Machine Learning–Based Clinical Decision Support Tool for Bevacizumab Risk Stratification in Oncology. Int J Drug Deliv Technol. 2026;16(30s):414-429. doi:10.25258/ijddt.16.30s.40.
  14. Rajendran OK. Self-supervised multimodal Learning for early cancer detection across Imaging and genomics. Power System Protection and Control. 2024;52(4):167-178. Doi:10.46121/pspc.52.4.14.
  15. Rajendran LKK. Impact of Treatment Modalities on Fertility, Sexual Function, and Psychological Outcomes in Testicular Cancer Survivors: A Comprehensive Review. Int J Drug Deliv Technol. 2026;16(30s):447-453. doi:10.25258/ijddt.16.30s.43.
  16. Rajendran LKK. Cancer nanomedicine: utilizing the enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) effect to deliver high payloads of chemotherapeutic agents directly to tumor sites. Power System Protection and Control. 2024;52(2):123-129. doi:10.46121/pspc.52.2.12.
  17. Kather JN, Calderaro J. Development of AI in digital pathology. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2020;17(10):591–595. doi:10.1038/s41571-020-00431-0.
  18. Rajendran OK. AI-based radiogenomic Models for predicting immunotherapy response In solid tumors. Power System Protection and Control. 2023;51(4):24-37. Doi:10.46121/pspc.51.4.4.
  19. Wan JCM, Massie C, Garcia-Corbacho J, et al. Liquid biopsies come of age: towards implementation of circulating tumour DNA. Nat Rev Cancer. 2017;17(4):223–238. doi:10.1038/nrc.2017.7.
  20. Rajendran OK. Federated radiology AI Models for multi-institutional cancer diagnosis Without data sharing. Power System Protection And Control. 2023;51(4):38-54. Doi:10.46121/pspc.51.4.5.
  21. Bera K, Schalper KA, Rimm DL, et al. Artificial intelligence in digital pathology — new tools for diagnosis and precision oncology. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2019;16(11):703–715. doi:10.1038/s41571-019-0252-y.
  22. Rajendran OK. DEEP LEARNING FOR CROSS-MODALITY MAPPING BETWEEN HISTOPATHOLOGY AND RADIOLOGICAL IMAGING. Power System Protection and Control. 2025;53(3):313-328. Doi:10.46121/pspc.53.3.21.
  23. Lu MY, Chen TY, Williamson DFK, et al. AI-based pathology predicts origins for cancers of unknown primary. Nature. 2021;594(7861):106–110. doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03512-4.
  24. Bilal M, Raza SEA, Azam A, et al. Development and validation of a weakly supervised deep learning framework to predict the risk of colorectal cancer recurrence from histology images. Lancet Oncol. 2021;22(11):153–163. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00430-5.
  25. Rajendran OK. DIGITAL TWIN FRAMEWORKS FOR PERSONALIZED CANCER PROGRESSION MODELING USING LONGITUDINAL DATA. Power System Protection and Control. 2025;53(4):486-501. Doi:10.46121/pspc.53.4.33.
  26. Rajendran LKK. Genomic profiling: utilizing Multi-omics data to identify potential Therapeutic targets and resistance markers. Power System Protection and Control. 2024;52(4):159-166. Doi:10.46121/pspc.52.4.13.
  27. Rajendran LKK. Immunotherapy and cell Therapy: developing CAR-T cell therapies and Other immune-based treatments for cancer and Autoimmune diseases. Power System Protection and Control. 2023;51(2):64-77. Doi:10.46121/pspc.51.2.7.
  28. Rajendran OK. FOUNDATION MODEL–DRIVEN PRECISION ONCOLOGY: INTEGRATING MULTI-OMICS, RADIOLOGY, AND CLINICAL DATA FOR PREDICTIVE CANCER CARE. Power System Protection and Control. 2024;52(2):154-163. Doi:10.46121/pspc.52.2.14.
  29. Rajendran LKK. Theranostics: integrating Diagnostic imaging agents and therapeutic Drugs into a single multifunctional nano-Platform for real-time monitoring of treatment. Power System Protection and Control.2025;53(2):376-386. Doi:10.46121/pspc.53.2.31.
  30. Rajendran LKK. Mechanisms driving Immunotherapy resistance in colorectal cancer Liver metastases. Power System Protection and Control. 2024;52(1):29-37. Doi:10.46121/pspc.52.1.5.
  31. Ching T, Himmelstein DS, Beaulieu-Jones BK, et al. Opportunities and obstacles for deep learning in biology and medicine. J R Soc Interface. 2018;15(141):20170387. doi:10.1098/rsif.2017.0387.
  32. Litjens G, Kooi T, Bejnordi BE, et al. A survey on deep learning in medical image analysis. Med Image Anal. 2017;42:60–88. doi:10.1016/j.media.2017.07.005.
  33. Hemanth Kumar RM. Integrated Transcriptomic and 3 Learning Framework Identifies a Blood-Based Biomarker Signature for Anthracycline-Induced Cardiotoxicity in Juvenile Cancer Survivors. Int J Drug Deliv Technol. 2026;16(40s):219-230. Doi:10.25258/ijddt.16.40s.24.
  34. Mobadersany P, Yousefi S, Amgad M, et al. Predicting cancer outcomes from histology and genomics using convolutional networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2018;115(13):E2970–E2979. doi:10.1073/pnas.1717139115.
  35. Lambin P, Leijenaar RTH, Deist TM, et al. Radiomics: the bridge between medical imaging and personalized medicine. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2017;14(12):749–762. doi:10.1038/nrclinonc.2017.141.
  36. Azizi S, Mustafa B, Ryan F, et al. Big self-supervised models advance medical image classification. Nature. 2021;594(7864):104–110. doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03476-6.
  37. Dosovitskiy A, Beyer L, Kolesnikov A, et al. An image is worth 16×16 words: transformers for image recognition at scale. arXiv. 2020. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2010.11929.
  38. Xu H, Usuyama N, Bagga J, et al. A whole-slide foundation model for digital pathology from real-world data. Nature. 2024;630(8015):181–188. doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07441-w.
  39. Singhal K, Azizi S, Tu T, et al. Large language models encode clinical knowledge. Nature. 2023;620(7972):172–180. doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06291-2.
  40. Moor M, Banerjee O, Abad ZSH, et al. Foundation models for generalist medical artificial intelligence. Nature. 2023;616(7956):259–265. doi:10.1038/s41586-023-05881-4.
  41. Chen RJ, Ding T, Lu MY, et al. Towards a general-purpose foundation model for computational pathology. Nat Med. 2024;30(3):850–862. doi:10.1038/s41591-024-02857-3.
  42. Huang SC, Pareek A, Seyyedi S, et al. Fusion of medical imaging and electronic health records using deep learning. Nat Med. 2020;26(3):446–453. doi:10.1038/s41591-019-0658-9.
  43. Kourou K, Exarchos TP, Exarchos KP, et al. Machine learning applications in cancer prognosis and prediction. Comput Struct Biotechnol J. 2015;13:8–17. doi:10.1016/j.csbj.2014.11.005.
  44. Cheerla A, Gevaert O. Deep learning with multimodal representation for pancancer prognosis prediction. Bioinformatics. 2019;35(14):i446–i454. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btz342.
  45. Yala A, Lehman C, Schuster T, et al. A deep learning mammography-based model for improved breast cancer risk prediction. Radiology. 2019;292(1):60–66. doi:10.1148/radiol.2019182716.
  46. Sun R, Limkin EJ, Vakalopoulou M, et al. A radiomics approach to assess tumour-infiltrating CD8 cells and response to anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 immunotherapy. Cancer Immunol Res. 2018;6(9):1105–1113. doi:10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-18-0169.
  47. He B, Dong D, She Y, et al. Predicting response to immunotherapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer using tumor mutational burden radiomic biomarker. J Immunother Cancer. 2020;8(2):e000550. doi:10.1136/jitc-2020-000550.
  48. Gillies RJ, Kinahan PE, Hricak H. Radiomics: images are more than pictures, they are data. Radiology. 2016;278(2):563–577. doi:10.1148/radiol.2015151169.
  49. Trebeschi S, Drago SG, Birkbak NJ, et al. Predicting response to cancer immunotherapy using noninvasive radiomic biomarkers. Ann Oncol. 2019;30(6):998–1004. doi:10.1093/annonc/mdz108.
  50. Kickingereder P, Burth S, Wick A, et al. Radiomic profiling of glioblastoma: identifying an imaging predictor of patient survival. Radiology. 2016;280(3):880–889. doi:10.1148/radiol.2016151015.
  51. Lao J, Chen Y, Li ZC, et al. A deep learning-based radiomics model for prediction of survival in glioblastoma multiforme. Sci Rep. 2017;7:10353. doi:10.1038/s41598-017-10649-8.
  52. Traverso A, Wee L, Dekker A, et al. Repeatability and reproducibility of radiomic features: a systematic review. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2018;102(4):1143–1158. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.05.053.
  53. Shao L, Wang Y, Cheng J. Vision transformers in medical imaging: a review. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2023;42(5):1234–1247. doi:10.1109/TMI.2022.3224411.
  54. Holzinger A, Carrington A, Müller H. Measuring the quality of explanations: the system causability scale (SCS). KI Künstliche Intelligenz. 2020;34:193–198. doi:10.1007/s13218-020-00636-z.
  55. Samek W, Montavon G, Vedaldi A, et al. Explainable AI: interpreting, explaining and visualizing deep learning. Proc IEEE. 2021;109(3):247–278. doi:10.1109/JPROC.2021.3050278.
  56. Chakravarty D, Solit DB. Clinical cancer genomic profiling. Nat Rev Genet. 2021;22(8):483–501. doi:10.1038/s41576-021-00362-0.
  57. Hao J, Kim Y, Mallavarapu T, et al. Interpretable AI for multi-omics cancer analysis. Brief Bioinform. 2021;22(6):bbab182. doi:10.1093/bib/bbab182.
  58. Sheller MJ, Reina GA, Edwards B, et al. Federated learning in medicine: facilitating multi-institutional collaborations without sharing patient data. Sci Rep. 2020;10:12598. doi:10.1038/s41598-020-69250-1.
  59. Vaswani A, Shazeer N, Parmar N, et al. Attention is all you need. Adv Neural Inf Process Syst. 2017;30:5998–6008.
  60. Hatamizadeh A, Tang Y, Nath V, et al. UNETR: transformers for 3D medical image segmentation. Proc IEEE WACV. 2022:574–584. doi:10.1109/WACV51458.2022.00066.

Reference

  1. Hanahan D. Hallmarks of cancer: new dimensions. Cancer Discov. 2022;12(1):31–46. doi:10.1158/2159-8290.CD-21-1059.
  2. Rajendran LKK. Machine Learning–Driven Symptom-Based Cancer Risk Stratification:A Systematic Review of Clinical Prediction Models and Methodological Rigor. Int J Drug Deliv Technol. 2026;16(40s):242-253.Doi:10.25258/ijddt.16.40s.26.
  3. Topol EJ. High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence. Nat Med. 2019;25(1):44–56. doi:10.1038/s41591-018-0300-7.
  4. Rajendran LKK. Interpretable Machine Learning for Early Mortality Prediction in Acute Myeloid Leukemia: A Decision Tree–Based Retrospective Cohort Study. Int J Drug Deliv Technol. 2026;16(40s):231-241.Doi:10.25258/ijddt.16.40s.25.
  5. Esteva A, Robicquet A, Ramsundar B, et al. A guide to deep learning in healthcare. Nat Med. 2019;25(1):24–29. doi:10.1038/s41591-018-0316-z.
  6. Rajendran LKK. Integrated Prognostic Modeling of Tumor Stage, Multimodal Therapy, and Functional Status in Lung Cancer Survival: A Real-World Cohort Study. Scientific Culture. 2026;12(5):567-576. Doi:10.5281/zenodo.1250046.
  7. Bommasani R, Hudson DA, Adeli E, et al. On the opportunities and risks of foundation models. arXiv. 2021. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2108.07258.
  8. Rajendran LKK. Integrative Pharmacogenomic Analysis of Drug Response Heterogeneity Across Cancer Cell Lines: Insights From Large-Scale GDSC Data. Scientific Culture. 2026;12(4):7537-7546. Doi:10.5281/zenodo.12426762.
  9. Acs B, Rantalainen M, Hartman J. Artificial intelligence as the next step towards precision pathology. J Intern Med. 2020;288(1):62–81. doi:10.1111/joim.13030.
  10. Rajendran LKK. Evaluating the Association of Cancer-Related Risk Factors With Multisystem Health: Insights Into Fertility, Cardiovascular, and Renal Indicators. Scientific Culture. 2026;12(4):7520-7527.Doi:10.5281/zenodo.12426760.
  11. Rajendran LKK. From Prediction to Precision: An Externally Validated Deep Learning–Based Survival and Adjuvant Therapy Recommendation System for Resected Stage III Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer. Int J Drug Deliv Technol. 2026;16(30s):430-438.doi:10.25258/ijddt.16.30s.41.
  12. Chen RJ, Lu MY, Wang J, et al. Pathomic fusion: an integrated framework for fusing histopathology and genomic features for cancer diagnosis and prognosis. Nat Mach Intell. 2022;4:179–193. doi:10.1038/s42256-022-00466-x.
  13. Rajendran LKK. From Prediction to Practice: A Machine Learning–Based Clinical Decision Support Tool for Bevacizumab Risk Stratification in Oncology. Int J Drug Deliv Technol. 2026;16(30s):414-429. doi:10.25258/ijddt.16.30s.40.
  14. Rajendran OK. Self-supervised multimodal Learning for early cancer detection across Imaging and genomics. Power System Protection and Control. 2024;52(4):167-178. Doi:10.46121/pspc.52.4.14.
  15. Rajendran LKK. Impact of Treatment Modalities on Fertility, Sexual Function, and Psychological Outcomes in Testicular Cancer Survivors: A Comprehensive Review. Int J Drug Deliv Technol. 2026;16(30s):447-453. doi:10.25258/ijddt.16.30s.43.
  16. Rajendran LKK. Cancer nanomedicine: utilizing the enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) effect to deliver high payloads of chemotherapeutic agents directly to tumor sites. Power System Protection and Control. 2024;52(2):123-129. doi:10.46121/pspc.52.2.12.
  17. Kather JN, Calderaro J. Development of AI in digital pathology. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2020;17(10):591–595. doi:10.1038/s41571-020-00431-0.
  18. Rajendran OK. AI-based radiogenomic Models for predicting immunotherapy response In solid tumors. Power System Protection and Control. 2023;51(4):24-37. Doi:10.46121/pspc.51.4.4.
  19. Wan JCM, Massie C, Garcia-Corbacho J, et al. Liquid biopsies come of age: towards implementation of circulating tumour DNA. Nat Rev Cancer. 2017;17(4):223–238. doi:10.1038/nrc.2017.7.
  20. Rajendran OK. Federated radiology AI Models for multi-institutional cancer diagnosis Without data sharing. Power System Protection And Control. 2023;51(4):38-54. Doi:10.46121/pspc.51.4.5.
  21. Bera K, Schalper KA, Rimm DL, et al. Artificial intelligence in digital pathology — new tools for diagnosis and precision oncology. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2019;16(11):703–715. doi:10.1038/s41571-019-0252-y.
  22. Rajendran OK. DEEP LEARNING FOR CROSS-MODALITY MAPPING BETWEEN HISTOPATHOLOGY AND RADIOLOGICAL IMAGING. Power System Protection and Control. 2025;53(3):313-328. Doi:10.46121/pspc.53.3.21.
  23. Lu MY, Chen TY, Williamson DFK, et al. AI-based pathology predicts origins for cancers of unknown primary. Nature. 2021;594(7861):106–110. doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03512-4.
  24. Bilal M, Raza SEA, Azam A, et al. Development and validation of a weakly supervised deep learning framework to predict the risk of colorectal cancer recurrence from histology images. Lancet Oncol. 2021;22(11):153–163. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00430-5.
  25. Rajendran OK. DIGITAL TWIN FRAMEWORKS FOR PERSONALIZED CANCER PROGRESSION MODELING USING LONGITUDINAL DATA. Power System Protection and Control. 2025;53(4):486-501. Doi:10.46121/pspc.53.4.33.
  26. Rajendran LKK. Genomic profiling: utilizing Multi-omics data to identify potential Therapeutic targets and resistance markers. Power System Protection and Control. 2024;52(4):159-166. Doi:10.46121/pspc.52.4.13.
  27. Rajendran LKK. Immunotherapy and cell Therapy: developing CAR-T cell therapies and Other immune-based treatments for cancer and Autoimmune diseases. Power System Protection and Control. 2023;51(2):64-77. Doi:10.46121/pspc.51.2.7.
  28. Rajendran OK. FOUNDATION MODEL–DRIVEN PRECISION ONCOLOGY: INTEGRATING MULTI-OMICS, RADIOLOGY, AND CLINICAL DATA FOR PREDICTIVE CANCER CARE. Power System Protection and Control. 2024;52(2):154-163. Doi:10.46121/pspc.52.2.14.
  29. Rajendran LKK. Theranostics: integrating Diagnostic imaging agents and therapeutic Drugs into a single multifunctional nano-Platform for real-time monitoring of treatment. Power System Protection and Control.2025;53(2):376-386. Doi:10.46121/pspc.53.2.31.
  30. Rajendran LKK. Mechanisms driving Immunotherapy resistance in colorectal cancer Liver metastases. Power System Protection and Control. 2024;52(1):29-37. Doi:10.46121/pspc.52.1.5.
  31. Ching T, Himmelstein DS, Beaulieu-Jones BK, et al. Opportunities and obstacles for deep learning in biology and medicine. J R Soc Interface. 2018;15(141):20170387. doi:10.1098/rsif.2017.0387.
  32. Litjens G, Kooi T, Bejnordi BE, et al. A survey on deep learning in medical image analysis. Med Image Anal. 2017;42:60–88. doi:10.1016/j.media.2017.07.005.
  33. Hemanth Kumar RM. Integrated Transcriptomic and 3 Learning Framework Identifies a Blood-Based Biomarker Signature for Anthracycline-Induced Cardiotoxicity in Juvenile Cancer Survivors. Int J Drug Deliv Technol. 2026;16(40s):219-230. Doi:10.25258/ijddt.16.40s.24.
  34. Mobadersany P, Yousefi S, Amgad M, et al. Predicting cancer outcomes from histology and genomics using convolutional networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2018;115(13):E2970–E2979. doi:10.1073/pnas.1717139115.
  35. Lambin P, Leijenaar RTH, Deist TM, et al. Radiomics: the bridge between medical imaging and personalized medicine. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2017;14(12):749–762. doi:10.1038/nrclinonc.2017.141.
  36. Azizi S, Mustafa B, Ryan F, et al. Big self-supervised models advance medical image classification. Nature. 2021;594(7864):104–110. doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03476-6.
  37. Dosovitskiy A, Beyer L, Kolesnikov A, et al. An image is worth 16×16 words: transformers for image recognition at scale. arXiv. 2020. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2010.11929.
  38. Xu H, Usuyama N, Bagga J, et al. A whole-slide foundation model for digital pathology from real-world data. Nature. 2024;630(8015):181–188. doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07441-w.
  39. Singhal K, Azizi S, Tu T, et al. Large language models encode clinical knowledge. Nature. 2023;620(7972):172–180. doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06291-2.
  40. Moor M, Banerjee O, Abad ZSH, et al. Foundation models for generalist medical artificial intelligence. Nature. 2023;616(7956):259–265. doi:10.1038/s41586-023-05881-4.
  41. Chen RJ, Ding T, Lu MY, et al. Towards a general-purpose foundation model for computational pathology. Nat Med. 2024;30(3):850–862. doi:10.1038/s41591-024-02857-3.
  42. Huang SC, Pareek A, Seyyedi S, et al. Fusion of medical imaging and electronic health records using deep learning. Nat Med. 2020;26(3):446–453. doi:10.1038/s41591-019-0658-9.
  43. Kourou K, Exarchos TP, Exarchos KP, et al. Machine learning applications in cancer prognosis and prediction. Comput Struct Biotechnol J. 2015;13:8–17. doi:10.1016/j.csbj.2014.11.005.
  44. Cheerla A, Gevaert O. Deep learning with multimodal representation for pancancer prognosis prediction. Bioinformatics. 2019;35(14):i446–i454. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btz342.
  45. Yala A, Lehman C, Schuster T, et al. A deep learning mammography-based model for improved breast cancer risk prediction. Radiology. 2019;292(1):60–66. doi:10.1148/radiol.2019182716.
  46. Sun R, Limkin EJ, Vakalopoulou M, et al. A radiomics approach to assess tumour-infiltrating CD8 cells and response to anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 immunotherapy. Cancer Immunol Res. 2018;6(9):1105–1113. doi:10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-18-0169.
  47. He B, Dong D, She Y, et al. Predicting response to immunotherapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer using tumor mutational burden radiomic biomarker. J Immunother Cancer. 2020;8(2):e000550. doi:10.1136/jitc-2020-000550.
  48. Gillies RJ, Kinahan PE, Hricak H. Radiomics: images are more than pictures, they are data. Radiology. 2016;278(2):563–577. doi:10.1148/radiol.2015151169.
  49. Trebeschi S, Drago SG, Birkbak NJ, et al. Predicting response to cancer immunotherapy using noninvasive radiomic biomarkers. Ann Oncol. 2019;30(6):998–1004. doi:10.1093/annonc/mdz108.
  50. Kickingereder P, Burth S, Wick A, et al. Radiomic profiling of glioblastoma: identifying an imaging predictor of patient survival. Radiology. 2016;280(3):880–889. doi:10.1148/radiol.2016151015.
  51. Lao J, Chen Y, Li ZC, et al. A deep learning-based radiomics model for prediction of survival in glioblastoma multiforme. Sci Rep. 2017;7:10353. doi:10.1038/s41598-017-10649-8.
  52. Traverso A, Wee L, Dekker A, et al. Repeatability and reproducibility of radiomic features: a systematic review. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2018;102(4):1143–1158. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.05.053.
  53. Shao L, Wang Y, Cheng J. Vision transformers in medical imaging: a review. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2023;42(5):1234–1247. doi:10.1109/TMI.2022.3224411.
  54. Holzinger A, Carrington A, Müller H. Measuring the quality of explanations: the system causability scale (SCS). KI Künstliche Intelligenz. 2020;34:193–198. doi:10.1007/s13218-020-00636-z.
  55. Samek W, Montavon G, Vedaldi A, et al. Explainable AI: interpreting, explaining and visualizing deep learning. Proc IEEE. 2021;109(3):247–278. doi:10.1109/JPROC.2021.3050278.
  56. Chakravarty D, Solit DB. Clinical cancer genomic profiling. Nat Rev Genet. 2021;22(8):483–501. doi:10.1038/s41576-021-00362-0.
  57. Hao J, Kim Y, Mallavarapu T, et al. Interpretable AI for multi-omics cancer analysis. Brief Bioinform. 2021;22(6):bbab182. doi:10.1093/bib/bbab182.
  58. Sheller MJ, Reina GA, Edwards B, et al. Federated learning in medicine: facilitating multi-institutional collaborations without sharing patient data. Sci Rep. 2020;10:12598. doi:10.1038/s41598-020-69250-1.
  59. Vaswani A, Shazeer N, Parmar N, et al. Attention is all you need. Adv Neural Inf Process Syst. 2017;30:5998–6008.
  60. Hatamizadeh A, Tang Y, Nath V, et al. UNETR: transformers for 3D medical image segmentation. Proc IEEE WACV. 2022:574–584. doi:10.1109/WACV51458.2022.00066.

Photo
Christopher Allen
Corresponding author

Senior Research Scientist, Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, North Carolina, USA

Photo
Dr. Zoe Richardson
Co-author

Consultant in Molecular Imaging, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, USA

Christopher Allen, Dr. Zoe Richardson, The Rise of Predictive Oncology: Artificial Intelligence for Early Detection, Risk Modeling, and Precision Therapy, Int. J. of Pharm. Sci., 2026, Vol 4, Issue 5, 6856-6872. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20393861

More related articles
Role of Pharmacovigilance in Monitoring of Adverse...
Ishika Dargude, Dr. Avinash Darekar, Lalan Wagh...
Advancing patient safety: Pharmacovigilance proces...
Vaishnavi Shrinivas , Sheelam Rajitha , Pullela Akarsh , Veeragon...
Formulation and Evaluation of Rice Starch Face Cre...
Nivedita Dhokane, Mangesh Pawar, Kunal Rewale, Kalyani Tambe, Dr....
Formulation And Evaluation of Diclofenac Sodium Gel for Treatment of Rheumatoid ...
Shweta Namange , Mundhe Aakansha, More mansi, Mutthe Prashant , Holkunde R.C , Dr.Ganesh tolsarwad ...
Development and Evaluation of a Polyherbal Topical Gel Containing Azadirachta in...
Bijoy Ghosh, Sameer Passi, Navneet Kaur, Manjay Mandal...
Related Articles
Nanocochleates: A Novel Lipid-Based Drug Delivery System...
Priyanka Thakare, Sachin Nikam, Rishikesh Bachhav, Khanderao Jadhav...
More related articles
Advancing patient safety: Pharmacovigilance processes, ADR reporting and Regula...
Vaishnavi Shrinivas , Sheelam Rajitha , Pullela Akarsh , Veeragoni Jayadev , Kappala SaiShivani ...
Formulation and Evaluation of Rice Starch Face Cream...
Nivedita Dhokane, Mangesh Pawar, Kunal Rewale, Kalyani Tambe, Dr.Jyoti Wagh...
Advancing patient safety: Pharmacovigilance processes, ADR reporting and Regula...
Vaishnavi Shrinivas , Sheelam Rajitha , Pullela Akarsh , Veeragoni Jayadev , Kappala SaiShivani ...
Formulation and Evaluation of Rice Starch Face Cream...
Nivedita Dhokane, Mangesh Pawar, Kunal Rewale, Kalyani Tambe, Dr.Jyoti Wagh...