ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2023
Generalizable and Automated Classification of TNM Stage from Pathology Reports with External Validation.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cancer staging is an essential clinical attribute informing patient prognosis and clinical trial eligibility. However, it is not routinely recorded in structured electronic health records. Here, we present a generalizable method for the automated classification of TNM stage directly from pathology report text. We train a BERT-based model using publicly available pathology reports across approximately 7,000 patients and 23 cancer types. We explore the use of different model types, with differing input sizes, parameters, and model architectures. Our final model goes beyond term-extraction, inferring TNM stage from context when it is not included in the report text explicitly. As external validation, we test our model on almost 8,000 pathology reports from Columbia University Medical Center, finding that our trained model achieved an AU-ROC of 0.815-0.942. This suggests that our model can be applied broadly to other institutions without additional institution-specific fine-tuning.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.