Can AI predict whether you'll die from cancer from just an image of your face?

October 19, 2026 4 min read Add Us On Google Add SciAm Can AI predict whether you’ll die from cancer from just an image of your face? Researchers tasked an algorithm with predicting cancer patients’ risk of dying. For some people, it was shockingly accurate By Jackie Flynn Mogensen edited by Claire Cameron AI "attention maps" for survival (left) and age (right) predictions From "Foundation artificial intelligence models for health recognition by use of face photographs (FAHR-Face): a model development and validation study" By Fridolin Haugg et. al in Lancet Digit Health ; October 2026; Courtesy of Mass General Brigham A new artificial intelligence model can predict a cancer patient’s risk of dying from a single photograph of their face, according to new research. While not perfectly accurate, the model found that people with higher risk-of-death scores, in general, had a higher risk of dying. The AI builds on how human doctors evaluate their patients’ health, says Ray Mak, a radiation oncologist at Mass General Brigham Cancer Institute, who conducted the research with his colleagues. “We’re trained in medical school to walk into a room, look at the patient and make an assessment—an impression of how healthy, frail or sick they are,” Mak says. That decision can help determine what treatment a patient receives—surgery, chemotherapy, radiation, and more. The problem, Mak says, is “that’s really a subjective assessment.” On supporting science journalism If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing . By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today. The AI, Mak and his team hope, could help doctors and patients make more informed, objective decisions about cancer treatment and end-of-life care . Mak and his colleagues trained an algorithm to analyze and “learn” 40 million images of faces without giving it a specific task. They then tweaked the model to analyze new photographs in two distinct ways: first, to estimate a person’s biological age and, second, to predict cancer patients’ odds of survival. The outcome was surprisingly accurate. In a test group of 3,820 cancer patients, more than half of those with the highest risk score—64 out of 122—died within just 90 days of when their photograph was taken. In a separate test group that included more than 38,000 cancer patients, those that looked older than their chronological age also had a higher risk of dying. “To our knowledge, this is the first report of an AI algorithm that can directly predict cancer patient survival from a simple face photograph,” the researchers write in the study, which was published on Monday in the journal Lancet Digital Health . The question is: How does the AI do this? For both age and death risk predictions, Mak and his team tracked where the algorithm was “looking” in its analysis, a technique they call “attention mapping.” For age prediction, they found that the AI tended to base its predictions on facial areas such as the nasolabial folds—the crease between your nose and mouth—and parts of the forehead. For risk of death, the AI tended to focus on the bridge of the nose and areas below the eyes. It’s unclear why those areas specifically correlated with a person’s risk of death. The two analyses work better together. “When we put both the face age and face survival scores into a clinical prognostic model, we do better at survival prediction than either one alone,” Mak says. In some cases, the AI may have been picking up on known health risks , such as smoking and alcohol use. When it came to the age estimate, smokers, for instance, were more likely to look older than their age, Mak says. The same was true of heavy alcohol drinkers. It also didn’t matter if a photograph showed a person frowning or smiling, with or without makeup or in various lighting. For age prediction, the AI was able to account for common forms of plastic surgery, Mak says. A major exception was rhinoplasty—the AI tended to rate people who’d had a nose job as slightly older in images taken after the surgery compared with images taken before it. Mak’s hope is that, eventually, an AI model like this could be deployed in hospitals and serve as an extra data point in doctors’ decision-making. It could also help serve as an early-warning system of disease if a patient appears to be aging faster than expected. Mass General Brigham has a patent pending for face health algorithms. Right now the AI is not ready for the clinic. For one, the cancer survival model was trained on a Boston-area cancer patient population that was majority white. Mak and his colleagues are working to expand their training sets to include a wider diversity of faces. (To that end, if you feel comfortable doing so, you can help train the algorithm and receive a “face age” estimate by sharing your own photographs here .) But the possibility of AI having any role in determining a patient’s treatment plan raises clear ethical questions. Matthew Liao, a professor and director of the Center for Bioethics at New York University, who was not involved in the new research, says that the paper was “interesting” and that this kind of tool could be useful for identifying people who might be sick and in need of extra care. But he notes it’s possible that an AI algorithm could slip up—and misidentify patients as being healthy or not. “If it gets it wrong, we might be sort of not providing care to someone who actually needs it,” he says. Liao also raised the question of insurance companies turning to this sort of technology to grant or deny coverage or employers using it to hire a given job candidate deemed to be “healthier” than another. “We really need to think through the societal implications of this thing as we try as we develop it further,” he says. Mak, for his part, is optimistic. “There’s still a lot of development ahead and clinical testing,” he says. “But we’re really excited that that we’re launching a completely new field in medicine.” Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community. When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production. Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber Thank you, Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American Subscribe