ArticleJCO clinical cancer informatics2026
Development and Assessment of a Pipeline for Extracting Structured Data From Free-Text Medical Reports Using a Large Language Model.
Article in JCO clinical cancer informatics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prediction of pathological complete response after neoadjuvant therapy in breast cancer using pretreatment core biopsy pathology reports: a pathology-report-driven model with exploratory clinical-laboratory fusion.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Precision oncology in gynecologic cancers: molecular taxonomy, biomarker-guided therapeutics, and the challenge of therapeutic resistance.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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeMedical free texts such as pathology reports contain valuable clinical data but are challenging to structure at scale. Traditional natural language processing approaches require extensive annotated data and training. We investigate the use of large language model (LLM) like Mistral to automatically extract three breast cancer (BC) biomarkers from pathology reports. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe developed and evaluated a pipeline combining Mistral Large LLM and a postprocessing phase. The pipeline's performance was assessed both at document and patient levels. For evaluation, two data sets were used: a data set of 1,152 pathology reports associated with 150 patients with BC focused solely on biomarker values and a gold standard database containing 101 patients with metastatic BC, enriched with detailed patient and tumor characteristics and double-blind validated by clinical research assistants. We also explored the pipeline's performance according to the use of a confidence prompt (CP), a chain of thought (CoT), and few-shot examples.
resultsOur extraction pipeline achieved F1 scores of more than 95% and both recall and precision of more than 94% for each biomarker of interest (ie, estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status and score) at the document level. At the patient level, the F1 score decreased between 87% and 90% with a greater drop in recall (ranging between 83% and 87%) compared with precision, which remained >90%. The results were similar whether the pipeline included a CP, CoT, or few-shot examples.
conclusionOur study provides strong evidence of the potential of LLMs like Mistral Large for extracting structured BC biomarker data from pathology reports and the potential of such methods for broader digital transformation of health care documents.
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.