Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40655537›Full record

ArticleJAMIA open2025

Large-scale deep learning for metastasis detection in pathology reports.

Patrycja Krawczuk, Zachary R Fox, Valentina Petkov, Serban Negoita, Jennifer Doherty, Antoinette Stroup, Stephen Schwartz, Lynne Penberthy, Elizabeth Hsu, John Gounley and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMIA open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Patrycja KrawczukAdvanced Computing for Health, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN 37830, United States.
Zachary R FoxAdvanced Computing for Health, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN 37830, United States.
Valentina PetkovNational Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Washington, DC 20830, United States.
Serban NegoitaNational Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Washington, DC 20830, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9327-9519
Jennifer DohertyUtah Cancer Registry, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, United States.
Antoinette StroupNew Jersey State Cancer Registry, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ 08901, United States.
Stephen SchwartzDivision of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA 98109, United States.
Lynne PenberthyNational Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Washington, DC 20830, United States.
Elizabeth HsuNational Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Washington, DC 20830, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3762-9315
John GounleyAdvanced Computing for Health, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN 37830, United States.
Heidi A HansonAdvanced Computing for Health, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN 37830, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: No existing algorithm can reliably identify metastasis from pathology reports across multiple cancer types and the entire US population. In this study, we develop a deep learning model that automatically detects patients with metastatic cancer by using pathology reports from many laboratories and of multiple cancer types. Materials and Methods: We use 60 471 unstructured pathology reports from 4 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registries. The reports were coded into 1 of 3 labels: metastasis negative, metastases positive, or metastasis undetermined. We utilize a task-specific deep neural network trained from scratch and compare its performance with a widely used large language model (LLM). Results: Our deep learning architecture trained on task-specific data outperforms a general-purpose LLM, with a recall of 0.894 compared to 0.824. We quantified model uncertainty and used it to defer reports for human review. We found that retaining 72.9% of reports increased recall from 0.894 to 0.969. Discussion: A smaller deep learning architecture trained on task-specific data outperforms a general LLM. Equally critical to model performance is the incorporation of uncertainty quantification, achieved here through an abstention mechanism. Conclusions: This study's finding demonstrate the feasibility of developing algorithms to automatically identify metastatic cancer cases from unstructured pathology reports.

Indexed as

machine learningmetastasisnatural language processingrecurrence

Identifiers

PMID40655537
PMCPMC12249207

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.