Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41863604›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2026

LLM-powered prostate cancer staging from PSMA-PET/CT reports using PROMISE v2.

Daniel Spitzl, Markus Mergen, Lukas Endroes, Christopher Spaeth, Rupert Trager, Rickmer F Braren, Matthias Eiber, Lisa Steinhelfer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

8 authors.

Daniel Spitzl *Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, School of Medicine, TUM University Hospital, Technical University of Munich, Ismaningerstr. 22, Munich, 81675, Germany.
Markus Mergen *Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, School of Medicine, TUM University Hospital, Technical University of Munich, Ismaningerstr. 22, Munich, 81675, Germany. markus.mergen@tum.de.ORCID 0009-0007-7753-2784
Lukas EndroesDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, School of Medicine, TUM University Hospital, Technical University of Munich, Ismaningerstr. 22, Munich, 81675, Germany.
Christopher SpaethDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, School of Medicine, TUM University Hospital, Technical University of Munich, Ismaningerstr. 22, Munich, 81675, Germany.
Rupert TragerDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, School of Medicine and Health, TUM University Hospital, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany.
Rickmer F BrarenDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, School of Medicine, TUM University Hospital, Technical University of Munich, Ismaningerstr. 22, Munich, 81675, Germany.
Matthias EiberDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Lisa SteinhelferDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accurate staging of prostate cancer is essential for guiding therapy and predicting outcomes. Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET/CT has become an established modality for disease assessment, and the PROMISE v2 framework provides standardized criteria for molecular imaging–based TNM (miTNM, molecular imaging TNM) classification. This study investigates the potential of large language models (LLMs) to automatically extract PROMISE v2 staging information from PSMA PET/CT reports. We retrospectively analyzed 1,696 reports from first-diagnosis prostate cancer patients using the open-source Meta-Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct (in the Q8_0 GGUF quantization) model, deployed securely within institutional infrastructure. Four prompting strategies were systematically compared: Zero-shot, advanced Zero-shot, few-shot, and chain-of-thought (CoT). Performance was evaluated using accuracy, precision, recall, and micro- and macro-averaged F1 scores. Advanced Zero-shot prompting achieved the highest performance for local staging (micro-F1 = 0.65), while CoT prompting was superior for nodal (micro-F1 = 0.79) and metastatic staging (micro-F1 = 0.84). Error analyses revealed that Zero-shot approaches tended to collapse predictions into central categories, whereas advanced Zero-shot and CoT prompting yielded more balanced and stage-specific outputs. These findings demonstrate that LLMs can reliably map narrative PET/CT reports onto structured PROMISE v2 staging categories, with prompting strategy strongly influencing performance across staging dimensions. Our results highlight the feasibility of LLM-based workflows for standardizing prostate cancer staging, enabling reproducibility, and supporting large-scale outcome analyses.

Indexed as

Antigens, SurfaceGlutamate Carboxypeptidase IILarge Language ModelsPositron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyProstatic NeoplasmsHumansMaleNeoplasm StagingRetrospective StudiesAntigens, SurfaceFOLH1 protein, humanGlutamate Carboxypeptidase IILLMPROMISE v2Prostate cancerPSMA-PET/CTTNM staging

Identifiers

PMID41863604
PMCPMC13249623

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.