Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41105871›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical informatics2025

Automated Esophageal Cancer Staging From Free-Text Radiology Reports: Large Language Model Evaluation Study.

Yao Yao, Xingxing Cen, Lu Gan, Jiehui Jiang, Min Wang, Yinghui Xu, Junyi Yuan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

7 authors.

Yao Yao *Information Center, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, No 241, West Huaihai Road, Shanghai, 200030, China, 86 22200000.ORCID 0000-0002-4979-7204
Xingxing Cen *Information Center, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, No 241, West Huaihai Road, Shanghai, 200030, China, 86 22200000.ORCID 0000-0002-1913-8590
Lu GanDepartment of Healthcare, INF Technology, Shanghai, China.ORCID 0009-0002-9401-4130
Jiehui JiangSchool of Life Sciences, Shanghai University, Shanghai, China.ORCID 0000-0003-4948-3683
Min WangSchool of Life Sciences, Shanghai University, Shanghai, China.ORCID 0000-0002-3436-4246
Yinghui XuArtificial Intelligence Innovation and Incubation Institute of Fudan University, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.ORCID 0009-0002-7346-2794
Junyi YuanInformation Center, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, No 241, West Huaihai Road, Shanghai, 200030, China, 86 22200000.ORCID 0000-0002-3143-1343

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Accurate staging of esophageal cancer is crucial for determining prognosis and guiding treatment strategies, but manual interpretation of radiology reports by clinicians is prone to variability and limited accuracy, resulting in reduced staging accuracy. Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have shown promise in medical applications, but their utility in esophageal cancer staging remains underexplored. Objective: This study aims to compare the performance of 3 locally deployed LLMs (INF-72B, Qwen2.5-72B, and LLaMA3.1-70B) and clinicians in preoperative esophageal cancer staging using free-text radiology reports. Methods: This retrospective study included 200 patients from Shanghai Chest Hospital who underwent esophageal cancer surgery from May to December 2024. The dataset consisted of 1134 Chinese free-text radiology reports. The reference standard was derived from postoperative pathological staging. A total of 3 LLMs determined tumor classification (T1-T4), node classification (N0-N3), and overall staging (I-IV) using 3 prompting strategies (zero-shot, chain-of-thought, and a proposed interpretable reasoning [IR] method). The McNemar test and Pearson chi-square test were used for comparisons. Results: INF-72B+IR achieved a superior overall staging accuracy of 61.5% and an F1-score of 0.60, substantially higher than the clinicians' accuracy of 39.5% and F1-score of 0.39 (all P<.001). Qwen2.5-72B+IR also demonstrated an advantage, achieving an overall staging accuracy of 46% and an F1-score of 0.51, which was better than the clinicians' performance (P<.001). LLaMA3.1-70B showed no statistically significant difference in overall staging performance compared to clinicians (all P>0.5). Conclusions: This study demonstrates that LLMs, particularly when guided by the proposed IR strategy, can accurately and reliably perform esophageal cancer staging from free-text radiology reports. This approach not only provides high-performance predictions but also offers a transparent and verifiable reasoning process, highlighting its potential as a valuable decision-support tool to augment human expertise in complex clinical diagnostic tasks.

Indexed as

Esophageal NeoplasmsNatural Language ProcessingNeoplasm StagingAgedChinaFemaleHumansLarge Language ModelsMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective Studiescancer stagingesophageal cancerlarge language modelradiology reportTNMtumor–node metastasis

Identifiers

PMID41105871
PMCPMC12533932

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.