ArticleNPJ precision oncology2025
Benchmarking large language models GPT-4o, llama 3.1, and qwen 2.5 for cancer genetic variant classification.
Article in NPJ precision oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Artificial intelligence in molecular pathology : Introduction and overview].Pathologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Applications of Large Language Models in Medical Research: From Systematic Reviews to Clinical Studies.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- ChatGPT in precision medicine.APL bioengineering · 2026Review
- Implementing generative artificial intelligence in precision oncology: safety, governance, and significance.Journal of hematology & oncology · 2026Review
- Distillation of a Locally Deployable 8B Language Model for Lung Histology Abstraction: A 33-Report Proof-of-Concept Study.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Article
- Evaluating Language Models for Biomedical Fact-Checking: A Benchmark Dataset for Cancer Variant Interpretation Verification.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- ADAM-1: An AI Reasoning and Bioinformatics Model for Alzheimer's Disease Detection and Microbiome-Clinical Data Integration.IEEE access : practical innovations, open solutions · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Classifying cancer genetic variants based on clinical actionability is crucial yet challenging in precision oncology. Large language models (LLMs) offer potential solutions, but their performance remains underexplored. This study evaluates GPT-4o, Llama 3.1, and Qwen 2.5 in classifying genetic variants from the OncoKB and CIViC databases, as well as a real-world dataset derived from FoundationOne CDx reports. GPT-4o achieved the highest accuracy (0.7318) in distinguishing clinically relevant variants from variants of unknown clinical significance (VUS), outperforming Qwen 2.5 (0.5731) and Llama 3.1 (0.4976). LLMs demonstrated better concordance with expert annotations for variants with strong clinical evidence but exhibited greater inconsistencies for those with weaker evidence. All three models showed a tendency to assign variants to higher evidence levels, suggesting a propensity for overclassification. Prompt engineering significantly improved accuracy, while retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) further enhanced performance. Stability analysis across 100 iterations revealed greater consistency with the CIViC system than with OncoKB. These findings highlight the promise of LLMs in cancer genetic variant classification while underscoring the need for further optimization to improve accuracy, consistency, and clinical applicability.
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.