% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@INPROCEEDINGS{Voigtlaender:1053902,
author = {Voigtlaender, Sebastian and Nelson, Thomas A and Karschnia,
Philipp and Vaios, Eugene J and Kim, Michelle M and Lohmann,
Philipp and Galldiks, Norbert and Filbin, Mariella G and
Azizi, Shekoofeh and Natarajan, Vivek and Monje, Michelle
and Dietrich, Jorg and Winter, Sebastian F},
title = {{INNV}-35. {A}rtificial intelligence in {N}euro-{O}ncology:
{M}apping the field},
issn = {1523-5866},
reportid = {FZJ-2026-01600},
year = {2025},
abstract = {AbstractBACKGROUNDArtificial intelligence (AI) is reshaping
neuro-oncology research and clinical practice. This abstract
summarizes key findings from a peer-reviewed review article
(accepted, The Lancet Digital Health), which maps AI
applications across the neuro-oncological care trajectory
and critically examines major opportunities, challenges, and
future directions.METHODSWe searched PubMed, ArXiv, and
Google Scholar using comprehensive MeSH term-based search
strings (e.g., “glioma,” “machine learning,”,
“foundation model,” “omics”) from
1/1/2020–12/7/2024. Article metadata were retrieved via
Python wrappers (built around PubMed and ArXiv APIs) or
manually (from Google Scholar). Records were screened and
deduplicated. Studies were selected based on predefined
criteria, including explicit use of machine learning (ML) as
a core technology, a multicentric or independent validation
cohort, and high methodological rigor.RESULTSScreening of
2,675 unique records revealed that current AI-neuro-oncology
literature primarily focuses on clinical neuroimaging or
omics, often using radiomics, deep learning, or traditional
ML, with fewer studies investigating advanced generative
models. Analysis of 52 original articles meeting inclusion
criteria identified robust AI applications in medical image
analysis (e.g., non-invasive diagnosis and response
assessment), digital neuropathology, biomarker discovery,
tumor phenotyping, patient risk stratification, personalized
precision treatment, and neuro-rehabilitative devices.
Exploratory approaches include generalist and agentic
neuro-oncology assistants, biophysical and causal models
(e.g., for neural–cancer dynamics), synthetic data, and
drug (target) discovery. Barriers to full integration
include major data gaps, limited clinical validation of
current tools, and unresolved ethical, legal, and regulatory
issues.CONCLUSIONSPromising AI use cases are emerging across
the neuro-oncological care trajectory, although current
data, validation, and implementation gaps limit clinical
deployment and scaling beyond narrowly defined tasks,
particularly for advanced generalist models. Closing these
gaps will require addressing data collection,
standardization and annotation challenges; prioritizing
rigorous prospective validation to demonstrate improved
clinical outcomes; and grounding tool development in
human-centred, ethical, and agile regulatory frameworks for
responsible innovation.},
month = {Nov},
date = {2025-11-20},
organization = {7th Quadrennial Meeting of the World
Federation of Neuro-Oncology Societies,
Honolulu (USA), 20 Nov 2025 - 23 Nov
2025},
cin = {INM-4},
ddc = {610},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)INM-4-20090406},
pnm = {5253 - Neuroimaging (POF4-525)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-5253},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)1},
doi = {10.1093/neuonc/noaf201.0924},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/1053902},
}