Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31710668›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2020

Automatic extraction of cancer registry reportable information from free-text pathology reports using multitask convolutional neural networks.

Mohammed Alawad, Shang Gao, John X Qiu, Hong Jun Yoon, J Blair Christian, Lynne Penberthy, Brent Mumphrey, Xiao-Cheng Wu, Linda Coyle, Georgia Tourassi

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

47 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. AI assistance in tumor multidisciplinary teams.ESMO real world data and digital oncology · 2026
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Mohammed AlawadComputational Sciences and Engineering Division, Health Data Sciences Institute, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA.
Shang GaoComputational Sciences and Engineering Division, Health Data Sciences Institute, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA.
John X QiuComputational Sciences and Engineering Division, Health Data Sciences Institute, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA.
Hong Jun YoonComputational Sciences and Engineering Division, Health Data Sciences Institute, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA.
J Blair ChristianComputational Sciences and Engineering Division, Health Data Sciences Institute, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA.
Lynne PenberthySurveillance Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
Brent MumphreyLouisiana Tumor Registry, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center School of Public Health, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA.
Xiao-Cheng WuLouisiana Tumor Registry, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center School of Public Health, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA.
Linda CoyleInformation Management Services Inc, Calverton, Maryland, USA.
Georgia TourassiComputational Sciences and Engineering Division, Health Data Sciences Institute, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveWe implement 2 different multitask learning (MTL) techniques, hard parameter sharing and cross-stitch, to train a word-level convolutional neural network (CNN) specifically designed for automatic extraction of cancer data from unstructured text in pathology reports. We show the importance of learning related information extraction (IE) tasks leveraging shared representations across the tasks to achieve state-of-the-art performance in classification accuracy and computational efficiency. MATERIALS AND

methodsMultitask CNN (MTCNN) attempts to tackle document information extraction by learning to extract multiple key cancer characteristics simultaneously. We trained our MTCNN to perform 5 information extraction tasks: (1) primary cancer site (65 classes), (2) laterality (4 classes), (3) behavior (3 classes), (4) histological type (63 classes), and (5) histological grade (5 classes). We evaluated the performance on a corpus of 95 231 pathology documents (71 223 unique tumors) obtained from the Louisiana Tumor Registry. We compared the performance of the MTCNN models against single-task CNN models and 2 traditional machine learning approaches, namely support vector machine (SVM) and random forest classifier (RFC).

resultsMTCNNs offered superior performance across all 5 tasks in terms of classification accuracy as compared with the other machine learning models. Based on retrospective evaluation, the hard parameter sharing and cross-stitch MTCNN models correctly classified 59.04% and 57.93% of the pathology reports respectively across all 5 tasks. The baseline models achieved 53.68% (CNN), 46.37% (RFC), and 36.75% (SVM). Based on prospective evaluation, the percentages of correctly classified cases across the 5 tasks were 60.11% (hard parameter sharing), 58.13% (cross-stitch), 51.30% (single-task CNN), 42.07% (RFC), and 35.16% (SVM). Moreover, hard parameter sharing MTCNNs outperformed the other models in computational efficiency by using about the same number of trainable parameters as a single-task CNN.

conclusionsThe hard parameter sharing MTCNN offers superior classification accuracy for automated coding support of pathology documents across a wide range of cancers and multiple information extraction tasks while maintaining similar training and inference time as those of a single task-specific model.

Indexed as

Machine LearningNatural Language ProcessingNeural Networks, ComputerRegistriesHumansInformation Storage and RetrievalNeoplasmsSupport Vector Machinecancer pathology reportsconvolutional neural networkdeep learninginformation extractionmultitask learningnatural language processing

Identifiers

PMID31710668
PMCPMC7489089

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.