How Natural Language Processing Can Aid With Pulmonary Oncology Tumor Node Metastasis Staging From Free-Text Radiology Reports: Algorithm Development and Validation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Natural language processing (NLP) is thought to be a promising solution to extract and store concepts from free text in a structured manner for data mining purposes. This is also true for radiology reports, which still consist mostly of free text. Accurate and complete reports are very important for clinical decision support, for instance, in oncological staging. As such, NLP can be a tool to structure the content of the radiology report, thereby increasing the report's value. OBJECTIVE: This study describes the implementation and validation of an N-stage classifier for pulmonary oncology. It is based on free-text radiological chest computed tomography reports according to the tumor, node, and metastasis (TNM) classification, which has been added to the already existing T-stage classifier to create a combined TN-stage classifier. METHODS: SpaCy, PyContextNLP, and regular expressions were used for proper information extraction, after additional rules were set to accurately extract N-stage. RESULTS: The overall TN-stage classifier accuracy scores were 0.84 and 0.85, respectively, for the training (N=95) and validation (N=97) sets. This is comparable to the outcomes of the T-stage classifier (0.87-0.92). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that NLP has potential in classifying pulmonary oncology from free-text radiological reports according to the TNM classification system as both the T- and N-stages can be extracted with high accuracy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".