ArticleJMIR medical informatics2025
Enabling Just-in-Time Clinical Oncology Analysis With Large Language Models: Feasibility and Validation Study Using Unstructured Synthetic Data.
Article in JMIR medical informatics, 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.
- Article
- Sequencing AI Automation and Data Interoperability in Oncology Using a Scenario-Planning Framework Coupled With Discrete-Event Simulation: Proof-of-Concept Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence Applications for Automated Data Extraction and Secondary Use of Clinical Information in Uro-oncology: A Systematic Review.European urology open science · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Traditional cancer registries, limited by labor-intensive manual data abstraction and rigid, predefined schemas, often hinder timely and comprehensive oncology research. While large language models (LLMs) have shown promise in automating data extraction, their potential to perform direct, just-in-time (JIT) analysis on unstructured clinical narratives-potentially bypassing intermediate structured databases for many analytical tasks-remains largely unexplored. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate whether a state-of-the-art LLM (Gemini 2.5 Pro) can enable a JIT clinical oncology analysis paradigm by assessing its ability to (1) perform high-fidelity multiparameter data extraction, (2) answer complex clinical queries directly from raw text, (3) automate multistep survival analyses including executable code generation, and (4) generate novel, clinically plausible hypotheses from free-text documentation. Methods: A synthetic dataset of 240 unstructured clinical letters from patients with stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), embedding 14 predefined variables, was used. Gemini 2.5 Pro was evaluated on four core JIT capabilities. Performance was measured by using the following metrics: extraction accuracy (compared to human extraction of n=40 letters and across the full n=240 dataset); numerical deviation for direct question answering (n=40 to 240 letters, 5 questions); log-rank P value and Harrell concordance index for LLM-generated versus ground-truth Kaplan-Meier survival analyses (n=160 letters, overall survival and progression-free survival); and correct justification, novelty, and a qualitative evaluation of LLM-generated hypotheses (n=80 and n=160 letters). Results: For multiparameter extraction from 40 letters, the LLM achieved >99% average accuracy, comparable to human extraction, but in significantly less time (LLM: 3.7 min vs human: 133.8 min). Across the full 240-letter dataset, LLM multiparameter extraction maintained >98% accuracy for most variables. The LLM answered multiconditional clinical queries directly from raw text with a relative deviation rarely exceeding 1.5%, even with up to 240 letters. Crucially, it autonomously performed end-to-end survival analysis, generating text-to-R-code that produced Kaplan-Meier curves statistically indistinguishable from ground truth. Consistent performance was demonstrated on a small validation cohort of 80 synthetic acute myeloid leukemia reports. Stress testing on data with simulated imperfections revealed a key role of a human-in-the-loop to resolve AI-flagged ambiguities. Furthermore, the LLM generated several correctly justified, biologically plausible, and potentially novel hypotheses from datasets up to 80 letters. Conclusions: This feasibility study demonstrated that a frontier LLM (Gemini 2.5 Pro) can successfully perform high-fidelity data extraction, multiconditional querying, and automated survival analysis directly from unstructured text. These results provide a foundational proof of concept for the JIT clinical analysis approach. However, these findings are confined to synthetic patients, and rigorous validation on real-world clinical data is an essential next step before clinical implementation can be considered.
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.