ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2025
Retrieval Augmented Therapy Suggestion for Molecular Tumor Boards: Algorithmic Development and Validation Study.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Challenges in AI Based Tumor Board Case Summarization and Recommendations.Research square · 2026Article
- Benchmarking large language models in breast cancer care: agreement with radiology-led multidisciplinary tumor board decisions.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- A context-augmented large language model for accurate precision oncology medicine recommendations.Cancer cell · 2026Article
- AI assistance in tumor multidisciplinary teams.ESMO real world data and digital oncology · 2026Review
- Artificial Authority: The Promise and Perils of LLM Judges in Healthcare.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- AI-enhanced oncology MDT 2.0: from multi-modal data synergy to value-based care reconstruction - a systematic review of clinical efficacy and socioeconomic benefits.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Clinical Accuracy and Safety Concerns Following GPT-5 Public Demonstration in Cancer Care.Journal of medical systems · 2025Article
- Large language models in oncology: a review.BMJ oncology · 2025Review
- Retrieval-Augmented Generation in Oncology: Promises, Pitfalls, and Early Applications.AI in precision oncologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMolecular tumor boards (MTBs) require intensive manual investigation to generate optimal treatment recommendations for patients. Large language models (LLMs) can catalyze MTB recommendations, decrease human error, improve accessibility to care, and enhance the efficiency of precision oncology.
objectiveIn this study, we aimed to investigate the efficacy of LLM-generated treatments for MTB patients. We specifically investigate the LLMs' ability to generate evidence-based treatment recommendations using PubMed references.
methodsWe built a retrieval augmented generation pipeline using PubMed data. We prompted the resulting LLM to generate treatment recommendations with PubMed references using a test set of patients from an MTB conference at a large comprehensive cancer center at a tertiary care institution. Members of the MTB manually assessed the relevancy and correctness of the generated responses.
resultsA total of 75% of the referenced articles were properly cited from PubMed, while 17% of the referenced articles were hallucinations, and the remaining were not properly cited from PubMed. Clinician-generated LLM queries achieved higher accuracy through clinician evaluation than automated queries, with clinicians labeling 25% of LLM responses as equal to their recommendations and 37.5% as alternative plausible treatments.
conclusionsThis study demonstrates how retrieval augmented generation-enhanced LLMs can be a powerful tool in accelerating MTB conferences, as LLMs are sometimes capable of achieving clinician-equal treatment recommendations. However, further investigation is required to achieve stable results with zero hallucinations. LLMs signify a scalable solution to the time-intensive process of MTB investigations. However, LLM performance demonstrates that they must be used with heavy clinician supervision, and cannot yet fully automate the MTB pipeline.
Indexed as
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.