Applying Natural Language Processing to Single-Report Prediction of Metastatic Disease Response Using the OR-RADS Lexicon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Generating Real World Evidence (RWE) on disease responses from radiological reports is important for understanding cancer treatment effectiveness and developing personalized treatment. A lack of standardization in reporting among radiologists impacts the feasibility of large-scale interpretation of disease response. This study examines the utility of applying natural language processing (NLP) to the large-scale interpretation of disease responses using a standardized oncologic response lexicon (OR-RADS) to facilitate RWE collection. Radiologists annotated 3503 retrospectively collected clinical impressions from radiological reports across several cancer types with one of seven OR-RADS categories. A Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT) model was trained on this dataset with an 80-20% train/test split to perform multiclass and single-class classification tasks using the OR-RADS. Radiologists also performed the classification to compare human and model performance. The model achieved accuracies from 95 to 99% across all classification tasks, performing better in single-class tasks compared to the multiclass task and producing minimal misclassifications, which pertained mostly to overpredicting the equivocal and mixed OR-RADS labels. Human accuracy ranged from 74 to 93% across all classification tasks, performing better on single-class tasks. This study demonstrates the feasibility of the BERT NLP model in predicting disease response in cancer patients, exceeding human performance, and encourages the use of the standardized OR-RADS lexicon to improve large-scale prediction 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 | 0.002 |
| 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".