Parreno, V. et al. Transient loss of polycomb components triggers epigenetic cancer fate. nature 629688–696 (2024).
Brown, R., Curry, E., Magnani, L., Wilhelm-Benartzi, CS, Borley, J. Epigenetic states and acquired drug resistance in cancer. nut. cancer pastor 14747–753 (2014).
Aduri, AK et al. Predict cellular responses to perturbations across a variety of state contexts. preprint in BioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.06.26.661135 (2025).
Zhao, S. et al. SToFM: A multiscale foundational model for spatial transcriptomics. Preprint available at http://arxiv.org/abs/2507.11588 (2025).
Bunne, C. et al. How to build virtual cells using artificial intelligence: Priorities and opportunities. cell 1877045–7063 (2024).
Salvador Barbero, B. Other CDK4/6 inhibitors impede recovery from cytotoxic chemotherapy in pancreatic adenocarcinoma. cancer cells 37340–353.e346 (2020).
Fang, Y. et al. Sequential therapy with PARP and WEE1 inhibitors minimizes toxicity while maintaining efficacy. cancer cells 35851–867.e857 (2019).
Lee, MJ et al. Sequential application of anticancer drugs promotes cell death by rewiring apoptotic signaling networks. cell 149780–794 (2012).
Goldman, A. et al. Transiently sequenced anticancer drugs overcome adaptive resistance by targeting vulnerable phenotypic transformations induced by chemotherapy. nut. common. 66139 (2015).
Liu, Z. et al. The proteomic and phosphoproteomic landscape of KRAS-mutant cancers identifies combination therapies. Mol. cell 814076–4090.e4078 (2021).
Wang, L., Lankhorst, L. & Bernards, R. Harnessing aging for the treatment of cancer. nut. cancer pastor twenty two340–355 (2022).
Wang, C. et al. Induction and exploitation of vulnerabilities in liver cancer treatment. nature 574268–272 (2019).
Lee, F. et al. Inhibiting methionine catabolism induces senescence and creates vulnerability to GSK3 inhibition in liver cancer. nut. cancer 5131–146 (2024).
Silver, D. et al. Master Go using deep neural networks and tree search. nature 529484–489 (2016).
Baek, M. et al. Accurate prediction of protein structure and interactions using three-track neural networks. science 373871–876 (2021).
Wang, G. et al. Optimizing glycemic control in type 2 diabetes with reinforcement learning: A proof-of-concept study. nut. medicine. 292633–2642 (2023).
Yara, A. et al. Optimize risk-based breast cancer screening policies using reinforcement learning. nut. medicine. 28136–143 (2022).
Zhang, H. et al. Algorithms for optimized mRNA design improve stability and immunogenicity. nature 621396–403 (2023).
Weaver, DT, King, ES, Maltas, J. & Scott, JG Reinforcement learning provides optimal treatment strategies to limit antibiotic resistance. National Academy of Procedures. Science. united states of america 121e2303165121 (2024).
Jo, K., Sung, I., Lee, D., Jang, H. & Kim, S. Inferring transcriptome cell states and transitions from time-series transcriptome data alone. Science. Member of Parliament 1112566 (2021).
Rockne, R.C. et al. State transition analysis of time-series gene expression identifies key points that predict the development of acute myeloid leukemia. cancer research institute 803157–3169 (2020).
Mnih, V. et al. Human-level control with deep reinforcement learning. nature 518529–533 (2015).
Lotfollahi, M. et al. Prediction of cellular responses to complex perturbations in high-throughput screening. Mol. system. Biol. 19e11517 (2023).
Huang, W. & Liu, H. Prediction of cellular responses of single cells to perturbations using cycle-consistent learning. bioinformatics 40i462–i470 (2024).
Piran, Z., Cohen, N., Hoshen, Y., Nitzan, M. Disentangling single-cell data with biolord. nut. biotechnology. 421678–1683 (2024).
Qi, X et al. Predicting transcriptional responses to novel chemical perturbations using deep generative models for drug discovery. nut. common. 159256 (2024).
Lotfollahi, M., Wolf, FA, Theis, FJ scGen predicts single cell perturbation responses. nut. method 16715–721 (2019).
Szalai, B. et al. Characterizing cell death and proliferation in perturbed transcriptomics data – from confounders to effective prediction. Nucleic acid research institute 4710010–10026 (2019).
Patwardhan, GA et al. Treatment schedule influences the evolution of drug resistance in a heterogeneous cancer cell population. NPJ breast cancer 760 (2021).
Johnson, TI et al. Quantifying cell cycle-dependent drug sensitivity in cancer using a high-throughput synchronization and screening approach. E-biomedicine 68103396 (2021).
Vijayaraghavalu, S., Dermawan, JK, Cheriyath, V. & Labhasetwar, V. Highly synergistic effects of sequential treatment with epigenetic drugs and anticancer drugs to overcome drug resistance in breast cancer cells are mediated through activation of p21 gene expression leading to G2/M cycle arrest. Mol. pharmacy. 10337–352 (2013).
Easwaran, H., Tsai, H.-C. & Baylin, SB Cancer epigenetics: tumor heterogeneity, stem-like plasticity, and drug resistance. Mol. cell 54716–727 (2014).
Bloom, SI, Islam, MT, Rezniewski, LA and Donato, AJ Mechanisms and consequences of endothelial cell aging. nut. Pastor Cardiol. 2038–51 (2023).
Sutton, RS, Barth, AG Reinforcement Learning: Introduction (MIT Press, 2018).
Subramanian, A. et al. Next generation connectivity map: L1000 platform and first 1,000,000 profiles. cell 1711437–1452. e1417 (2017).
Barrett, T. et al. NCBI GEO: Functional Genomics Data Set Archive – Updated. Nucleic acid research institute 41D991–D995 (2012).
RDKit: Open source cheminformatics; https://www.rdkit.org
Enache, OM et al. GCTx format and cmap {Py, R, M, J} package: resources for optimized storage and unified traversal of annotated dense matrices. bioinformatics 351427–1429 (2019).
Kingma, DP & Ba, J. Adam: Stochastic optimization techniques. Preprint available at http://arxiv.org/abs/1412.6980 (2014).
Prechelt, L. Neural networks: trading tips 55–69 (Springer, 2002).
Paszke, A. et al. PyTorch: An imperative-style high-performance deep learning library. in 33rd Neural Information Processing Systems Conference (NeurIPS 2019) https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper_files/paper/2019/file/bdbca288fee7f92f2bfa9f7012727740-Paper.pdf (2019).
Seashore-Ludlow, B. et al. Harnessing the connectivity of large-scale small molecule sensitivity datasets. Discovery of cancer. 51210–1223 (2015).
Pedregosa, F. et al. Scikit-learn: Machine learning in Python. J. Mach. learn. resolution 122825–2830 (2011).
Brownlee, J. A gentle introduction to rectified linear units (ReLU). Mach. learn. mastery 6 (2019).
Yang, L., Liu, S., Tsoka, S., Papageorgiou, LG Mathematical programming for piecewise linear regression analysis. expert system. application 44156–167 (2016).
Wagenmaker, E.-J. & Farrell, S. AIC model selection using Akaike weights. Saikon. Bull. pastor 11192–196 (2004).
Wu, T. et al. clusterProfiler 4.0: A general-purpose enrichment tool for interpreting omics data. innovation 2100141 (2021).
Wishart, DS et al. DrugBank 5.0: Major update to the 2018 DrugBank database. Nucleic acid research institute 46D1074–D1082 (2018).
Virtanen, P. et al. SciPy 1.0: Basic algorithms for scientific computing in Python. nut. method 17261–272 (2020).
Martin, M. Cutadapt removes adapter sequences from high-throughput sequencing reads. EMB Net J. 1710–12 (2011).
Dobin, A. & Gingeras, TR Mapping RNA-seq reads using STAR. car. Protok. Bioinform. 5111.14. November 14th – November 14th. 19 (2015).
Li, B. & Dewey, CN RSEM: Accurate transcript quantification from RNA-seq data with or without a reference genome. BMC bioinf. 12323 (2011).
Love, MI, Huber, W. & Anders, S. Reasonable estimation of fold change and variance of RNA-seq data using DESeq2. Genome Biol. 15550 (2014).
Brockman, G. et al. OpenAI Gym. Preprint available at http://arxiv.org/abs/1606.01540 (2016).
Weng, J. et al. Tiansho: A highly modular deep reinforcement learning library. J. Mach. learn. resolution twenty three1–6 (2022).
