ArticleArtificial intelligence review2025
A survey of NLP methods for oncology in the past decade with a focus on cancer registry applications.
Article in Artificial intelligence review, 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.
- Leveraging traditional and advanced machine learning for comprehensive oncology data integration and outcome prediction.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2026Review
- Hierarchical prompting with reasoning large language models for immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated myocarditis evidence extraction pilot study.European heart journal. Digital health · 2026Article
- A Secure, Scalable Large Language Model-Based System (CIDER) for High-Throughput Clinical Data Extraction From Medical Reports: Retrospective Validation Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Article
- Review
- Digital Registrar: A Schema-First Framework for Multi-Cancer Privacy-Preserving Pathology Abstraction via Local LLMs.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Design and evaluation of an automated pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia registry from clinical data warehouses.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Venous Thromboembolism Prevention: A Narrative Review of Machine Learning, Deep Learning, and Natural Language Processing.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2026Review
- Applications of artificial intelligence in non-small cell lung cancer: from precision diagnosis to personalized prognosis and therapy.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Clinical texts from pathology and radiology reports provide critical information for cancer diagnosis and staging. This study surveys the application of natural language processing (NLP) in cancer registry operations from 2014 to 2024. A total of 156 articles from Scopus and PubMed were reviewed and were categorized by NLP methods, document types, cancer sites, and research aims. NLP approaches were evenly distributed across rule-based (n=70), machine learning (n=66), and traditional deep learning (n=70), with transformer models (n=29) gaining prominence since 2019. Encoder-only models like BERT and its clinical adaptations (e.g., ClinicalBERT, RadBERT) show significant promise, though methods for increasing context length are needed. Decoder-only models (e.g., GPT-3, GPT-4) are less explored due to privacy concerns and computational demands. Notably, pediatric cancers, melanomas, and lymphomas are underrepresented, as are research areas such as disease progression, clinical trial matching, and patient communication. Multi-modal models, important for precision oncology and cancer screening, are also scarce. Our study highlights the potential of NLP to enhance data abstraction efficiency and accuracy in cancer registries, making greater use of cancer registry data for patient benefit. However, further research is needed to fully leverage transformer-based models, particularly for underrepresented cancer types and outcomes. Addressing these gaps can improve the timeliness, completeness, and accuracy of structured data collection from clinical text, ultimately enhancing cancer research and patient outcomes. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10462-025-11316-5.
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.