ArticleDigital health
Clinical reasoning from real-world oncology reports using large language models.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- WiNGPT-32B: An Open-Source, Locally Deployable LLM for RECIST Assessment via Chained Task Execution Using Radiology Report Text.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the ability of large language models (LLMs) to perform structured information extraction and guideline-based clinical inferences from radiology and pathology reports in real-world oncology. Methods: We constructed a Question Answering (Q&A) benchmark dataset using 3650 radiological and 588 pathological reports from 1632 patients. The tasks included direct extraction of genomic and histological findings, as well as clinical reasoning tasks, such as Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST)-based tumor response classification and American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC)-based tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) staging. We compared the performance of the Gemma family of open-source LLMs (Gemma 4B, a lightweight 4-billion parameter model, and Gemma 12B, a larger 12-billion parameter model) with and without structured reasoning prompts designed according to clinical guidelines. Results: The 12B model achieved high performance in direct extraction tasks from pathology reports, with F1-score ranging from 92.6 to 93.3 across genomic and histological variables. Furthermore, when guided by structured reasoning prompts, it also showed substantial improvements in reasoning tasks, achieving an F1-score of 81.5 (95% CI: 79.8-83.3) for tumor response, 74.3 (95% CI: 70.8-77.8) for T-stage, 87.1 (95% CI: 85.1-89.0) for N-stage, and 90.8 (95% CI: 89.1-92.2) for M-stage. In contrast, the 4B model showed inconsistent performance and was sometimes degraded under reasoning prompts. Conclusion: This study shows that LLMs can perform complex guideline-based clinical reasoning using real-world radiology reports. By combining the RECIST/AJCC criteria with structured prompts, we demonstrated how LLMs can move beyond surface-level extraction to support nuanced inference in oncology, with implications for future clinical applications.
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.