Large Language Model-Based Entity Extraction Reliably Classifies Pancreatic Cysts and Reveals Predictors of Malignancy: A Cross-Sectional and Retrospective Cohort Study
Papale, A. J.; Flattau, R.; Vithlani, N.; Mahajan, D.; Ziemba, Y.; Zavadsky, T.; Carvino, A.; King, D.; Nadella, S.
Show abstract
Pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs) are often discovered incidentally on imaging and may progress to pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). PCLs have a high incidence in the general population, and adherence to screening guidelines can be variable. With the advent of technologies that enable automated text classification, we sought to evaluate various natural language processing (NLP) tools including large language models (LLMs) for identifying and classifying PCLs from radiology reports. We correlated our classification of PCLs to clinical features to identify risk factors for a positive PDAC biopsy. We contrasted a previously described NLP classifier to LLMs for prospective identification of PCLs in radiology. We evaluated various LLMs for PCL classification into low-risk or high-risk categories based on published guidelines. We compared prompt-based PCL classification to specific entity-guided PCL classification. To this end, we developed tools to deidentify radiology and track patients longitudinally based on their radiology reports. Additionally, we used our newly developed tools to evaluate a retrospective database of patients who underwent pancreas biopsy to determine associated factors including those in their radiology reports and clinical features using multivariable logistic regression modelling. Of 14,574 prospective radiology reports, 665 (4.6%) described a pancreatic cyst, including 175 (1.2%) high-risk lesions. Our Entity-Extraction Large Language Model tool achieved recall 0.992 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.985-0.998), precision 0.988 (0.979-0.996), and F1-score 0.990 (0.985-0.995) for detecting cysts; F1-scores were 0.993 (0.987-0.998) for low-risk and 0.977 (0.952-0.995) for high-risk classification. Among 4,285 biopsy patients, 330 had pancreatic cysts documented [≥]6 months before biopsy. In the final multivariable model (AUC = 0.877), independent predictors of adenocarcinoma were change in duct caliber with upstream atrophy (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 4.94; 95% CI, 1.30-18.79), mural nodules (AOR, 11.02; 1.81-67.26), older age (AOR, 1.10; 1.05-1.16), lower body mass index (AOR, 0.86; 0.76-0.96), and total bilirubin (AOR, 1.81; 1.18-2.77). Automated NLP-based analysis of radiology reports using LLM-driven entity extraction can accurately identify and risk-stratify PCLs and, when retrospectively applied, reveal factors predicting malignant progression. Widespread implementation may improve surveillance and enable earlier intervention.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Prediction of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula using radiomic features and preoperative data 94%
- Identification of patients at risk for pancreatic cancer in a 3-year timeframe based on machine learning algorithms 93%
- VISTA: Virtual ImmunoSTAining for pancreatic disease quantification in murine cohorts 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Deep learning models for poorly differentiated colorectal adenocarcinoma classification in whole slide images using transfer learning 91%
- Auto-detection of motion artifacts on CT pulmonary angiograms with a physician-trained AI algorithm 90%
- Volumetric lung cancer screening reduces unnecessary low-dose computed tomography scans: results from a single-centre prospective trial on 4,119 subjects 88%
Similar papers in this journal
- Non-endoscopic screening for Barrett’s esophagus and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma in at risk Veterans 89%
- Genetic Evidence for a Causal Link between Intra-Pancreatic Fat Deposition and Pancreatitis: a Mendelian Randomization Study 88%
- Nonendoscopic Detection Of Barrett’S Esophagus In Patients Without Gerd Symptoms 88%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.