Back

Automated Extraction of Cancer Registry Data from Pathology Reports: Comparing LLM-Based and Ontology-Driven NLP Platforms

McPhaul, T.; Kreimeyer, K.; Baris, A.; Botsis, T.

2026-03-23 health informatics
10.64898/2026.03.20.26348915 medRxiv
Show abstract

Cancer data standardization requires converting unstructured pathology reports into structured registry variables, a mostly manual and resource-intensive task. We evaluated two automated extraction platforms: Brim Analytics, an LLM-based system that guides and orchestrates abstraction, and DeepPhe, an ontology-driven system. Using 330 pancreatic adenocarcinoma and 34 breast cancer pathology reports from Johns Hopkins Hospital, we assessed both under deployment-realistic conditions. Brim Analytics achieved high accuracy across seven registry variables in pancreatic cancer (mean 96.7%), including T stage (96.4%) and histologic grade (97.0%), with a 3.0 p.p. decline on breast cancer (mean 93.7%). DeepPhe performed comparably for N stage (96.4% pancreatic, 94.1% breast) but had notable T stage deficits (83.6% pancreatic, 70.6% breast). Per-report processing times averaged 0.9 s (Brim, pancreatic), 4.6 s (Brim, breast), 1.1 s (DeepPhe, pancreatic), and 3.5 s (DeepPhe, breast). These results indicate that LLM-based extraction can achieve high accuracy across cancer types and support automated data workflows.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"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.