ArticleBreast cancer research and treatment2025
Natural language processing for local, regional, and distant breast cancer relapse identification in pathology reports.
Article in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
purposeCancer registries rarely track breast cancer relapse due to the resource-intensive nature of manual chart review. To address this gap, we developed natural language processing (NLP) models to automate the identification of breast cancer relapse in pathology reports.
methodsWe collected pathology reports from patients diagnosed with breast cancer between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2014, in British Columbia, Canada, and manually annotated each for the presence or absence of local, regional, distant, and any breast cancer relapses. With these reports, we fine-tuned large language models to classify pathology reports.
resultsThe corpus contained 1,888 pathology reports from a cohort of 993 breast cancer patients. Of these reports, 673 (35.6%) described local, 296 (15.7%) regional, and 654 (34.6%) distant relapses. In addition, 1,510 (80.0%) described at least one of any relapse type. The median time from diagnosis to first relapse was 7.3 years (range 0.2-18.2). All models demonstrated excellent performance. The local-relapse model performed particularly well, with > 93% accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and 0.98 area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) score.
conclusionWe developed NLP models to detect breast cancer relapses from pathology reports with excellent accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and AUC. NLP may facilitate more efficient and accurate collection of breast cancer outcomes data from clinical reports.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40897953What 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.