Abstract:Zhoumeng Lin, 1– 4, &ast Wei-Chun Chou, 1– 4, &ast Yi-Hsien Cheng, 3, 4 Chunla He, 5 Nancy A Monteiro-Riviere, 6, 7 Jim E Riviere 7, 8 1 Department of Environmental and Global Health, College of Public Health and Health Professions, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA; 2 Center for Environmental and Human Toxicology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA; 3 Institute of Computational Comparative Medicine, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, USA; 4 Department of Anatomy and Physiology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, USA; 5 Department of Biostatistics, College of Public Health and Health Professions, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA; 6 Nanotechnology Innovation Center of Kansas State, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, USA; 7 Center for Chemical Toxicology Research and Pharmacokinetics, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA; 8 1Data Consortium, Kansas State University, Olathe, KS, USA &astThese authors contributed equally to this work Correspondence: Zhoumeng Lin, Department of Environmental and Global Health, College of Public Health and Health Professions, University of Florida, 1225 Center Dr., Gainesville, FL, 32610, USA, Tel +1 352-273-6160, Email Background: Low delivery efficiency of nanoparticles (NPs) to the tumor is a critical barrier in the field of cancer nanomedicine. Strategies on how to improve NP tumor delivery efficiency remain to be determined. Methods: This study analyzed the roles of NP physicochemical properties, tumor models, and cancer types in NP tumor delivery efficiency using multiple machine learning and artificial intelligence methods, using data from a recently published Nano-Tumor Database that contains 376 datasets generated from a physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model. Results: The deep neural network model adequately predicted the delivery efficiency of different NPs to different tumors and it outperformed all other machine learning methods; including random forest, support vector machine, linear regression, and bagged model methods. The adjusted determination coefficients (R 2 ) in the full training dataset were 0.92, 0.77, 0.77 and 0.76 for the maximum delivery efficiency (DE max ), delivery efficiency at 24 h (DE 24 ), at 168 h (DE 168 ), and at the last sampling time (DE Tlast ). The corresponding R 2 values in the test dataset were 0.70, 0.46, 0.33 and 0.63, respectively. Also, this study showed that cancer type was an important determinant for the deep neural network model in predicting the tumor delivery efficiency across all endpoints (19– 29%). Among all physicochemical properties, the Zeta potential and core material played a greater role than other properties, such as the type, shape, and targeting strategy. Conclusion: This study provides a quantitative model to improve the design of cancer nanomedicine with greater tumor delivery efficiency. These results help to improve our understanding of the causes of low NP tumor delivery efficiency. This study demonstrates the feasibility of integrating artificial intelligence with PBPK modeling approaches to study cancer nanomedicine. Graphical Keywords: artificial intelligence, machine learning, physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling, nanomedicine, drug delivery, nanotechnology Graphical Global Cancer Statistics estimated that almost 10 million deaths occurred worldwide due to cancer in 2020. 1 The treatment of cancer remains a challenge. Traditional small molecule-based chemotherapy has limitations; such as adverse side effects, low therapeutic indices, low bioavailability, high-dose requirements, lack of specificity, and development of multi-drug resistance. 2 Recent advances in nanotechnology enabled nanoparticle (NP)-based drug formulations to be designed with superior properties compared to traditional small molecule chemotherapy, including high drug loading, specific targeting/delivery, and the ability to regulate the release of the anticancer drug in a controlled or sustained manner. 3 During the last 30 years, many nanomedicines were designed and tested to be effective in reducing the size of various tumor types in laboratory animals, 4,5 but only a limited number of nanomedicines have been translated to clinical success and approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration (US FDA) or European Medicines Agency (EMA). 6 Low clinical translation of animal results -Abstract Truncated-

Toward Predicting Nanoparticle Distribution in Heterogeneous Tumor Tissues

Spatial transcriptomics inferred from pathology whole-slide images links tumor heterogeneity to survival in breast and lung cancer

Predicting tissue distribution and tumor delivery of nanoparticles in mice using machine learning models

An artificial intelligence-assisted physiologically-based pharmacokinetic model to predict nanoparticle delivery to tumors in mice

Multimodal Radiomics Model for Predicting Gold Nanoparticles Accumulation in Mouse Tumors

Predicting Nanoparticle Delivery to Tumors Using Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence Approaches

Drug-loaded nanoparticles for cancer therapy: a high-throughput multicellular agent-based modeling study

Massively parallel pooled screening reveals genomic determinants of nanoparticle delivery

Quantitative Imaging of Intracellular Nanoparticle Exposure Enables Prediction of Nanotherapeutic Efficacy

Particle uptake in cancer cells can predict malignancy and drug resistance using machine learning

Nanoparticle Accumulation and Penetration in 3D Tumor Models: the Effect of Size, Shape, and Surface Charge

Learning what keeps nanomedicines in tumours

Anti-cancer Drug Synergy Prediction in Understudied Tissues using Transfer Learning

Machine-learning-assisted single-vessel analysis of nanoparticle permeability in tumour vasculatures

Profiling Breast Tumor Heterogeneity and Identifying Breast Cancer Subtypes Through Tumor‐Associated Immune Cell Signatures and Immuno Nano Sensors

Bayesian Inference of Tissue Heterogeneity for Individualized Prediction of Glioma Growth

Meta-Analysis of Nanoparticle Distribution in Tumors and Major Organs in Tumor-Bearing Mice

Using birth-death processes to infer tumor subpopulation structure from live-cell imaging drug screening data

Interpretable XGBoost-SHAP model predicts the nanoparticles delivery and reveals its interaction with tumor genomic profiles

Cross-scale tracing of nanoparticles and tumors at the single-cell level using the whole-lung atlas

Nanoscale Detection of Subcellular Nanoparticles by X-Ray Diffraction Imaging for Precise Quantitative Analysis of Whole Cancer Cells