ArticleNEJM AI2024
CORAL: Expert-Curated Oncology Reports to Advance Language Model Inference.
Article in NEJM AI, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 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
34 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development of a benchmarking dataset for symptom detection using large language models.JAMIA open · 2026Article
- OncoPT: long-context transformer models for in hospital tumor phenotype extraction from pathology reports.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Converting unstructured cardiac catheterization and echocardiography reports into structured data using transformer-based language models.JAMIA open · 2026Article
- Natural language processing to identify documented pain preceding radiation therapy for bone metastases.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2026Article
- Article
- Development and Assessment of a Pipeline for Extracting Structured Data From Free-Text Medical Reports Using a Large Language Model.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2026Article
- SDoH-GPT: using large language models to extract social determinants of health.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2026Article
- Simulated patient systems powered by large language model-based AI agents offer potential for transforming medical education.Communications medicine · 2025Article
- Optimising large language models for clinical information extraction: a benchmarking study in the context of ulcerative colitis research.BMJ digital health & AI · 2025Article
- The role of artificial intelligence-based foundation models and "copilots" in cancer pathology: potential and challenges.Journal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR · 2025Review
- For clinical data extraction, QLoRA attains accuracy close to LoRA while requiring lower compute resources.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Large Language Models in Population Oncology: A Contemporary Review on the Use of Large Language Models to Support Data Collection, Aggregation, and Analysis in Cancer Care and Research.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2025Review
- Generative artificial intelligence for automated data extraction from unstructured medical text.JAMIA open · 2025Article
- Development and Evaluation of Natural Language Processing Methods for Extracting Key Melanoma Pathology Concepts.Studies in health technology and informatics · 2025Article
- Detecting New Lesions Using a Large Language Model: Applications in Real-World Multiple Sclerosis Datasets.Annals of neurology · 2025Article
- Iterative refinement and goal articulation to optimize large language models for clinical information extraction.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- The MI-CLAIM-GEN checklist for generative artificial intelligence in health.Nature medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- The potential of large language models to advance precision oncology.EBioMedicine · 2025Review
- Prompts to Table: Specification and Iterative Refinement for Clinical Information Extraction with Large Language Models.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBoth medical care and observational studies in oncology require a thorough understanding of a patient's disease progression and treatment history, often elaborately documented within clinical notes. As large language models (LLMs) are being considered for use within medical workflows, it becomes important to evaluate their potential in oncology. However, no current information representation schema fully encapsulates the diversity of oncology information within clinical notes, and no comprehensively annotated oncology notes exist publicly, thereby limiting a thorough evaluation.
methodsWe curated a new fine-grained, expert-labeled dataset of 40 deidentified breast and pancreatic cancer progress notes at the University of California, San Francisco, and assessed the abilities of three recent LLMs (GPT-4, GPT-3.5-turbo, and FLAN-UL2) in
resultsOur team annotated 9028 entities, 9986 modifiers, and 5312 relationships. The GPT-4 model exhibited overall best performance, with an average BLEU score of 0.73, an average ROUGE score of 0.72, an average EM F1 score of 0.51, and an average accuracy of 68% (expert manual evaluation on subset). Notably, GPT-4 was proficient in tumor characteristic and medication extraction and demonstrated superior performance in advanced reasoning tasks of inferring symptoms due to cancer and considerations of future medications. Common errors included partial responses with missing information and hallucinations with note-specific information.
conclusionsBy developing a comprehensive schema and benchmark of oncology-specific information in oncology notes, we uncovered both the strengths and the limitations of LLMs. Our evaluation showed variable zero-shot extraction capability among the GPT-3.5-turbo, GPT-4, and FLAN-UL2 models and highlighted a need for further improvements, particularly in complex medical reasoning, before performing reliable information extraction for clinical research and complex population management and documenting quality patient care. (Funded by the National Institute of Health, Food and Drug Administration and others.).
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.