ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2026
Multimodal Large Language Models for Cystoscopic Image Interpretation and Bladder Lesion Classification: Comparative Study.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Authors' Reply: Beyond Visual Consensus: Tiered Reference Framework for AI Cystoscopy Studies.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Beyond Visual Consensus: Tiered Reference Framework for AI Cystoscopy Studies.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Assessment of Large Language Models in Colorectal Cancer Multidisciplinary Tumor Board Decision-Making: A Retrospective Single-Center Comparison of Guideline-Integrated General-Purpose vs. Domain-Specialized Models.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Article
- Multimodal artificial intelligence in urologic precision oncology: from algorithm to translational medicine (a systemized narrative review).Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCystoscopy remains the gold standard for diagnosing bladder lesions; however, its diagnostic accuracy is operator dependent and prone to missing subtle abnormalities such as carcinoma in situ or misinterpreting mimic lesions (tumor, inflammation, or normal variants). Artificial intelligence-based image-analysis systems are emerging, yet conventional models remain limited to single tasks and cannot produce explanatory reports or articulate diagnostic reasoning. Multimodal large language models (MM-LLMs) integrate visual recognition, contextual reasoning, and language generation, offering interpretive capabilities beyond conventional artificial intelligence.
objectiveThis study aims to rigorously evaluate state-of-the-art MM-LLMs for cystoscopic image interpretation and lesion classification using clinician-defined stress-test datasets enriched with rare, diverse, and challenging lesions, focusing on diagnostic accuracy, reasoning quality, and clinical relevance.
methodsFour MM-LLMs (OpenAI-o3 and ChatGPT-4o [OpenAI]; Gemini 2.5 Pro and MedGemma-27B [Google]) were evaluated under blinded, randomized procedures across two tasks: (1) free-text image interpretation for anatomic site, findings, lesion reasoning, and final diagnosis (n=401) and (2) seven-class tumor-like lesion classification (n=113) within a multiple-choice framework (cystitis, polyps, papilloma, papillary urothelial carcinoma, carcinoma in situ, non-urothelial carcinoma, and none of the above). Three raters independently scored outputs using a 5-point Likert scale, and classification metrics (accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, Youden J index (Youden J), and Matthews correlation coefficient [MCC]) were calculated for lesion detection, biopsy indication, and malignancy endpoints. For optimization, model performance was compared between zero-shot and text-based in-context learning prompts that were prefixed with brief descriptions of tumor features.
resultsThe 401-image test set spanned 40 subcategories, with 322 (80.3%) containing abnormal findings in the image interpretation task. OpenAI-o3 demonstrated strong reasoning, with high satisfaction for anatomy (339/401, 84.5%) and findings (305/401, 76%), but lower satisfaction for lesion reasoning (211/401, 52.5%) and final diagnosis (193/401, 48.2%), indicating increasing difficulty with higher-order synthesis. Mean Likert score differences (OpenAI-o3 minus Gemini 2.5 Pro) were +0.27 for findings (adjusted P value: q=0.002), +0.24 for lesion reasoning (q=0.047), and +0.19 for final diagnosis. For clinically relevant endpoints in the full set, OpenAI-o3 achieved the most balanced performance, with lesion detection accuracy of 88.3%, sensitivity of 92%, specificity of 73.1%, Youden J of 0.650, and MCC of 0.635. In 7-class tumor-like lesion classification, OpenAI-o3 achieved accuracies of 73.5% for biopsy indication and 62.8% for malignancy, with a balanced sensitivity-specificity trade-off, outperforming other models. Notably, OpenAI-o3 performed best on prevalent malignant lesions. ChatGPT-4o and Gemini 2.5 Pro showed high sensitivity but low specificity, whereas MedGemma-27B underperformed. In-context learning improved OpenAI-o3 microaverage accuracy (40.7%→46.0%; MCC 0.311→0.370) but yielded only slight specificity gains and minimal accuracy change in other models, likely constrained by the absence of paired image-text context.
conclusionsMM-LLMs demonstrate meaningful assistive potential in generating interpretable cystoscopy free-text rationales and supporting biopsy triage and training. However, performance in difficult differential diagnoses remains modest and requires further optimization before safe clinical integration.
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.