ArticleScientific reports2025
Exploring the use of large language models for classification, clinical interpretation, and treatment recommendation in breast tumor patient records.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Intelligent Support for Radiotherapy: A Review of Clinical Applications for Large Language Models.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- A multi-scale hybrid ResNet-transformer with distance-aware learning for interpretable BI-RADS mammographic classification.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Large language models for breast cancer treatment planning: a blinded real-world evaluation of DeepSeek, ChatGPT, and oncologist recommendations.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aims to investigate and compare the diagnostic performance, disease interpretation reliability, and treatment recommendation capabilities of multiple advanced large language models (GPT-4o, DeepSeek-R1, and DeepSeek-V3) in breast tumor cases. It retrospectively collected comprehensive clinical records of patients with breast tumors treated at Taizhou Cancer Hospital between January and April 2024. The study evaluated the accuracy of tumor classification (benign vs. malignant), the quality of disease interpretation, and the appropriateness of treatment recommendations generated by each model. To assess the clinical interpretability and utility of the models, a comprehensive performance analysis was conducted using statistical methods. A total of 45 patients with breast tumors were included, comprising 37 benign and 8 malignant cases (43 females, 2 males). GPT-4o achieved the highest area under the curve (AUC) for tumor classification (AUC = 0.848), outperforming DeepSeek-R1 (AUC = 0.736) and DeepSeek-V3 (AUC = 0.723). However, DeLong's test indicated that the differences in AUCs among the models were not statistically significant (p > 0.05). In addition, subjective evaluations by doctors indicated that DeepSeek-R1 received the highest scores for disease interpretation (4.73 ± 0.46) and treatment recommendations (4.70 ± 0.51), with consistent ratings.
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.