Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41093969›Full record

ArticleCommunications medicine2025

Introducing mCODEGPT as a zero-shot information extraction from clinical free text data tool for cancer research.

Kai Zhang, Tongtong Huang, Bradley A Malin, Travis Osterman, Qi Long, Xiaoqian Jiang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Communications medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

6 authors.

Kai Zhang *Department of Data Science and Artificial Intelligence, McWilliams School of Biomedical Informatics, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX, USA.
Tongtong Huang *Department of Data Science and Artificial Intelligence, McWilliams School of Biomedical Informatics, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4007-8991
Bradley A MalinDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.
Travis OstermanDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.
Qi LongDepartment of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0660-5230
Xiaoqian JiangDepartment of Data Science and Artificial Intelligence, McWilliams School of Biomedical Informatics, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX, USA. xiaoqian.jiang@uth.tmc.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9933-2205

Funding

Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (Cancer Prevention Research Institute of Texas) RR180012
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe vast amount of natural language clinical notes about patients with cancer presents a challenge for efficient information extraction, standardization, and structuring. Traditional NLP methods require extensive annotation by domain experts for each type of named entity and necessitate model training, highlighting the need for an efficient and accurate extraction method.

methodsThis study introduces a tool based on the Large Language Model (LLM) for zero-shot information extraction from cancer-related clinical notes into structured data aligned with the minimal Common Oncology Data Elements (mCODE™) structure. We utilize the zero-shot learning capabilities of LLMs for information extraction, eliminating the need for data annotated by domain experts for training. Our methodology employs advanced hierarchical prompt engineering strategies to overcome common LLM limitations like token hallucination and accuracy issues. We tested the approach on 1,000 synthetic clinical notes representing various cancer types, comparing its performance to a traditional single-step prompting method.

resultsOur hierarchical prompt engineering strategy (accuracy = 94%, misidentification, and misplacement rate = 5%) outperforms the traditional prompt strategy (accuracy = 87%, misidentification, and misplacement rate = 10%) in information extraction. By unifying staging systems (e.g., TNM, FIGO) and specific stage details (e.g., Stage II) into a standardized framework, our approach achieves improved accuracy in extracting cancer stage information.

conclusionsOur approach demonstrates that LLMs, when guided by structured prompting, can accurately extract complex clinical information without the need for expert-labeled data. This method has the potential to harness unstructured data for advancing cancer research.

Identifiers

PMID41093969
PMCPMC12528503

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.