ArticleNeuropathology : official journal of the Japanese Society of Neuropathology2025
Diagnostic Performance of ChatGPT-4.0 in Histopathological Analysis of Gliomas: A Single Institution Experience.
Article in Neuropathology : official journal of the Japanese Society of Neuropathology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnostic Performance of Contemporary Large Language Models on Free-Text Histopathologic Descriptions in Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology.Head and neck pathology · 2026Article
- AI-Powered Histology for Molecular Profiling in Brain Tumors: Toward Smart Diagnostics from Tissue.Cancers · 2025Review
- Diagnostic Performance of ChatGPT-4.0 in Histopathological Analysis of Gliomas: A Single Institution Experience.Neuropathology : official journal of the Japanese Society of Neuropathology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the performance of ChatGPT-4.0 as a diagnostic support tool for pathologists in identifying different types of gliomas based on histopathological data and to compare its performance with that of another artificial intelligence tool (Gemini 2.5 Pro). A retrospective analysis was performed on 25 cases with histopathological descriptions. The dataset, anonymized for patient confidentiality, included clinical details such as age, sex, and site, along with two histological images for each case, obtained from the archive files of the Anatomic Pathology section, Department of Medical, Surgical Sciences and Advanced Technologies "G.F. Ingrassia" University of Catania, Italy. ChatGPT-4.0 was tasked with generating diagnoses, which were classified as correct, similar, or different when compared to the pathologists' conclusions and the diagnoses provided by Gemini. ChatGPT-4.0 achieved a diagnostic accuracy of 88%, correctly identifying 22 out of 25 cases. No significant differences in diagnostic performance were observed between male and female patients. The AI performed exceptionally well in diagnosing glioblastomas, with a 100% accuracy rate, while two oligodendrogliomas and one astrocytoma IDH-mutant G3 were misdiagnosed. A comparative evaluation with Gemini 2.5 Pro was also conducted, although its contribution was limited to a qualitative comparison based on the same dataset. ChatGPT-4.0 demonstrated moderate accuracy in the histopathological diagnosis of gliomas, with little variability depending on glioma subtype. While its performance highlights potential for future integration into clinical workflows, significant improvements are required to ensure its reliability and effectiveness in diagnostic applications. Trial Registration: ce 165/2015/PO.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.