MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407187061 · doi:10.3389/frai.2025.1513674

Targeted generative data augmentation for automatic metastases detection from free-text radiology reports

2025· article· en· W4407187061 on OpenAlexafffund
Maede Ashofteh Barabadi, Xiaodan Zhu, Wai Yip Chan, Amber L. Simpson, Richard Kinh Gian

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Artificial Intelligence · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceContext (archaeology)Task (project management)Natural language processingIdentification (biology)Artificial intelligenceF1 scoreLanguage modelData extractionMachine learningInformation extractionInformation retrievalMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Automatic identification of metastatic sites in cancer patients from electronic health records is a challenging yet crucial task with significant implications for diagnosis and treatment. In this study, we demonstrate how advancements in natural language processing, namely the instruction-following capability of recent large language models and extensive model pretraining, made it possible to automate metastases detection from radiology reports texts with a limited amount of gold-labeled data. Specifically, we prompt Llama3, an open-source instruction-tuned large language model, to generate synthetic training data to expand our limited labeled data and adapt BERT, a small pretrained language model, to the task. We further investigate three targeted data augmentation techniques which selectively expand the original training samples, leading to comparable or superior performance compared to vanilla data augmentation, in most cases, while being substantially more computationally efficient. In our experiments, data augmentation improved the average F1-score by 2.3, 3.5, and 3.9 points for lung, liver, and adrenal glands, the organs for which we had access to expert-annotated data. This observation suggests that Llama3, which has not been specifically tailored to this task or clinical data in general, can generate high-quality synthetic data through paraphrasing in the clinical context. We also compare metastasis identification accuracy between models utilizing institutionally standardized reports vs. non-structured reports, which complicate the extraction of relevant information, and show how including patient history with a customized model architecture narrows the gap between those two setups from 7.3 to 4.5 points on F1-score under LoRA tuning. Our work delivers a broadly applicable solution with remarkable performance that does not require model customization for each institution, making large-scale, low-cost spatio-temporal cancer progression pattern extraction possible.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.963
Threshold uncertainty score0.670

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.058
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.261 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Artificial IntelligenceSame topicTopic ModelingFrench-language works237,207