Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42450777›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2026

Generative AI in Veterinary Pathology: Feasibility of a GPT-Based Assistive Tool for Gross, Cytologic, and Histopathologic Assessment of Canine Cutaneous Neoplasms-A Pilot Study.

Evaristo Di Napoli, Luigi Emiliano Maria Zumbo, Davide De Biase, Giuseppe Piegari, Serenella Papparella, Valeria Russo, Orlando Paciello

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Evaristo Di NapoliDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, 80137 Naples, Italy.ORCID 0009-0008-6975-1482
Luigi Emiliano Maria ZumboDepartment of Earth and Marine Sciences (DiSTeM), University of Palermo, 90123 Palermo, Italy.ORCID 0009-0005-6431-3422
Davide De BiaseDepartment of Pharmacy, University of Salerno, 84084 Fisciano, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-8118-9807
Giuseppe PiegariDepartment of Human Sciences, Link Campus University, 00165 Roma, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-1637-4205
Serenella PapparellaDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, 80137 Naples, Italy.
Valeria RussoDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, 80137 Naples, Italy.
Orlando PacielloDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, 80137 Naples, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-3091-0905

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Canine cutaneous neoplasms are common and morphologically heterogeneous lesions whose diagnosis relies on integrating gross examination, cytology, and histopathology. This retrospective pilot study assessed the feasibility of a multimodal GPT-based large language model as an assistive, not autonomous, tool for standardized description, differential diagnosis generation, and classification support across this diagnostic workflow. Fifty-one histologically confirmed canine cutaneous tumors were retrospectively selected from the laboratory information system of the Veterinary Pathology Laboratory, University of Naples Federico II. For each case, de-identified gross photographs, digitized cytology, and representative histologic images were provided to the model using templated prompts. Model outputs were independently reviewed by two veterinary pathologists, who reached consensus on descriptive quality and diagnostic concordance with the histologic reference diagnosis. Final diagnostic outputs were classified as correct, partially correct, or incorrect. Strict accuracy was defined as the proportion of fully correct diagnoses, whereas broad accuracy combined correct and partially correct outputs considered diagnostically informative. Overall, the model achieved a strict diagnostic accuracy of 66.7% (34/51; 95% CI: 53.0-78.0) and a broad diagnostic accuracy of 90.2% (46/51; 95% CI: 79.0-95.7). Performance was highest in epithelial tumors and lower in mesenchymal and melanocytic tumors, in which the model more often identified broader diagnostic categories than specific histotypes. These findings suggest that GPT-based systems may support report standardization, descriptive consistency, and morphology-driven reasoning in veterinary pathology. However, reduced entity-level specificity, variable descriptive quality, and the risk of plausible but non-concordant outputs require strict human supervision and further validation before routine implementation.

Indexed as

computational dermatopathologydecision support systemsgenerative artificial intelligenceimage-based pathologymorphological assessment

Identifiers

PMID42450777
PMCPMC13359981

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.