Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38962662›Full record

ArticleJAMIA open2024

Leveraging GPT-4 for identifying cancer phenotypes in electronic health records: a performance comparison between GPT-4, GPT-3.5-turbo, Flan-T5, Llama-3-8B, and spaCy's rule-based and machine learning-based methods.

Kriti Bhattarai, Inez Y Oh, Jonathan Moran Sierra, Jonathan Tang, Philip R O Payne, Zach Abrams, Albert M Lai

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMIA open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing 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

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

  1. Large Language Models in Lung Cancer: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Kriti BhattaraiInstitute for Informatics, Data Science & Biostatistics, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO 63110, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8168-4923
Inez Y OhInstitute for Informatics, Data Science & Biostatistics, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO 63110, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0780-8710
Jonathan Moran SierraMedical Scientist Training Program, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO 63110, United States.
Jonathan TangDepartment of Internal Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO 63110, United States.
Philip R O PayneInstitute for Informatics, Data Science & Biostatistics, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO 63110, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9532-2998
Zach AbramsInstitute for Informatics, Data Science & Biostatistics, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO 63110, United States.
Albert M LaiInstitute for Informatics, Data Science & Biostatistics, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO 63110, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9241-2656

Funding

Washington University Center for Cellular ImagingP30CA091842 · NCI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI TIMOTHY J. EBERLEIN · 2001 to 2026
$128.0M
WU INSTITUTE OF CLINICAL AND TRANSLATIONAL SCIENCESUL1TR002345 · NCATS · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI William G. Powderly · 2017 to 2026
$97.8M
NATIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE AWARD-MEDICAL SCIENTISTT32GM007200 · NIGMS · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI YOKOYAMA, WAYNE M. · 1985 to 2024
$59.8M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002345NCI NIH HHS P30 CA091842NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM007200
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Accurately identifying clinical phenotypes from Electronic Health Records (EHRs) provides additional insights into patients' health, especially when such information is unavailable in structured data. This study evaluates the application of OpenAI's Generative Pre-trained Transformer (GPT)-4 model to identify clinical phenotypes from EHR text in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. The goal was to identify disease stages, treatments and progression utilizing GPT-4, and compare its performance against GPT-3.5-turbo, Flan-T5-xl, Flan-T5-xxl, Llama-3-8B, and 2 rule-based and machine learning-based methods, namely, scispaCy and medspaCy. Materials and Methods: Phenotypes such as initial cancer stage, initial treatment, evidence of cancer recurrence, and affected organs during recurrence were identified from 13 646 clinical notes for 63 NSCLC patients from Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri. The performance of the GPT-4 model is evaluated against GPT-3.5-turbo, Flan-T5-xxl, Flan-T5-xl, Llama-3-8B, medspaCy, and scispaCy by comparing precision, recall, and micro-F1 scores. Results: GPT-4 achieved higher F1 score, precision, and recall compared to Flan-T5-xl, Flan-T5-xxl, Llama-3-8B, medspaCy, and scispaCy's models. GPT-3.5-turbo performed similarly to that of GPT-4. GPT, Flan-T5, and Llama models were not constrained by explicit rule requirements for contextual pattern recognition. spaCy models relied on predefined patterns, leading to their suboptimal performance. Discussion and Conclusion: GPT-4 improves clinical phenotype identification due to its robust pre-training and remarkable pattern recognition capability on the embedded tokens. It demonstrates data-driven effectiveness even with limited context in the input. While rule-based models remain useful for some tasks, GPT models offer improved contextual understanding of the text, and robust clinical phenotype extraction.

Indexed as

clinical phenotype extractionelectronic health recordsgenerative pre-trained transformer (GPT)large language modelsnatural language processing

Identifiers

PMID38962662
PMCPMC11221943

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.