Large language models as a diagnostic support tool in neuropathology
Open accessAbstract
The WHO guidelines for classifying central nervous system (CNS) tumours are changing considerably with each release. The classification of CNS tumours is uniquely complex among most other solid tumours as it incorporates not just morphology, but also genetic and epigenetic features. Keeping current with these changes across medical fields can be challenging, even for clinical specialists. Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated their ability to parse and process complex medical text, but their utility in neuro‐oncology has not been systematically tested. We hypothesised that LLMs can effectively diagnose neuro‐oncology cases from free‐text histopathology reports according to the latest WHO guidelines. To test this hypothesis, we evaluated the performance of ChatGPT‐4o, Claude‐3.5‐sonnet, and Llama3 across 30 challenging neuropathology cases, which each presented a complex mix of morphological and genetic information relevant to the diagnosis. Furthermore, we integrated these models with the latest WHO guidelines through Retrieval‐Augmented Generation (RAG) and again assessed their diagnostic accuracy. Our data show that LLMs equipped with RAG, but not without RAG, can accurately diagnose the neuropathological tumour subtype in 90% of the tested cases. This study lays the groundwork for a new generation of computational tools that can assist neuropathologists in their daily reporting practice.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Only 3 studies in the review explicitly mentioned extracting text from tables or figures during the pre-retrieval process.
“Only 3 studies in our review explicitly mentioned extracting text from tables or figures during the pre-retrieval process.25,27,44”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Ayers, J. W., Poliak, A., Dredze, M., Leas, E. C., Zhu, Z., Kelley, J. B., Faix, D. J., Goodman, A. M., Longhurst, C. A., Hogarth, M., et al. (2023) · JAMA Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2023.1838 · Cited by 2,613 · see citing works
Toward expert-level medical question answering with large language models
Singhal, K., Tu, T., Gottweis, J., Sayres, R., Wulczyn, E., Amin, M., Hou, L., Clark, K., Pfohl, S. R., Cole-Lewis, H., et al. (2025) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41591-024-03423-7 · Cited by 1,734 · see citing works
Benchmarking Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Medicine
Xiong, G., Jin, Q., Lu, Z., & Zhang, A. (2024) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics ACL 2024 · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.findings-acl.372 · Cited by 310 · see citing works
Wada, A., Akashi, T., Shih, G., Hagiwara, A., Nishizawa, M., Hayakawa, Y., Kikuta, J., Shimoji, K., Sano, K., Kamagata, K., et al. (2024) · Diagnostics · doi:10.3390/diagnostics14141541 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 16
- [2]Kung TH, Cheatham M, Medenilla A, et al. Performance of ChatGPT on USMLE: potential for AI‐assisted medical education using large language models. PLoS Digit Health 2023; 2: e0000198. 36812645 PMC9931230
- [3]Patel SB, Lam K. ChatGPT: the future of discharge summaries? Lancet Digit Health 2023; 5: e107– e108. 36754724
- [4]Ali SR, Dobbs TD, Hutchings HA, et al. Using ChatGPT to write patient clinic letters. Lancet Digit Health 2023; 5: e179– e181. 36894409
- [6]Rao A, Kim J, Kamineni M, et al. Evaluating ChatGPT as an adjunct for radiologic decision‐making. medRxiv 2023. 10.1101/2023.02.02.23285399. PMC10733745 37356806 · DOI · Paper page
- [7]Kresevic S, Giuffrè M, Ajcevic M, et al. Optimization of hepatological clinical guidelines interpretation by large language models: a retrieval augmented generation‐based framework. npj Digit Med 2024; 7: 1– 9. 38654102 PMC11039454
- [8]Ono D, Dickson DW, Koga S. Evaluating the efficacy of few‐shot learning for GPT‐4Vision in neurodegenerative disease histopathology: a comparative analysis with convolutional neural network model. Neuropathol Appl Neurobiol 2024; 50: e12997. 39010256
- [10]Ostrom QT, Price M, Neff C, et al. CBTRUS statistical report: primary brain and other central nervous system tumors diagnosed in the United States in 2016–2020. Neuro Oncol 2023; 25: iv1– iv99. 37793125 PMC10550277
- [12]Weller M, van den Bent M, Preusser M, et al. EANO guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of diffuse gliomas of adulthood. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2020; 18: 170– 186. 33293629 PMC7904519
- [13]Khalid N, Qayyum A, Bilal M, et al. Privacy‐preserving artificial intelligence in healthcare: techniques and applications. Comput Biol Med 2023; 158: 106848. 37044052
- [14]Wiest IC, Leßmann M‐E, Wolf F, et al. Anonymizing medical documents with local, privacy preserving large language models: the LLM‐anonymizer. bioRxiv 2024. 10.1101/2024.06.11.24308355. · DOI
- [16]Kumar RP, Sivan V, Bachir H, et al. Can artificial intelligence mitigate missed diagnoses by generating differential diagnoses for neurosurgeons? World Neurosurg 2024; 187: e1083– e1088. 38759788
- [17]Zaki HA, Aoun A, Munshi S, et al. The application of large language models for radiologic decision making. J Am Coll Radiol 2024; 21: 1072– 1078. 38224925
- [18]Madadi Y, Delsoz M, Lao PA, et al. ChatGPT assisting diagnosis of neuro‐ophthalmology diseases based on case reports. medRxiv 2023. 10.1101/2023.09.13.23295508. PMC12341750 40830998 · DOI
- [19]Chen TC, Kaminski E, Koduri L, et al. Chat GPT as a neuro‐score calculator: analysis of a large language model's performance on various neurological exam grading scales. World Neurosurg 2023; 179: e342– e347. 37634667
- [20]Koga S, Martin NB, Dickson DW. Evaluating the performance of large language models: ChatGPT and Google Bard in generating differential diagnoses in clinicopathological conferences of neurodegenerative disorders. Brain Pathol 2024; 34: e13207. 37553205 PMC11006994
- [21]Nazario‐Johnson L, Zaki HA, Tung GA. Use of large language models to predict neuroimaging. J Am Coll Radiol 2023; 20: 1004– 1009. 37423349
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Liu, S., McCoy, A. B., & Wright, A. (2025) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1093/jamia/ocaf008 · Cited by 200 · see citing works
- Authors
- Hewitt, K. J., Wiest, I. C., Carrero, Z. I., Bejan, L., Millner, T. O., Brandner, S., & Kather, J. N.
- Affiliations
- University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus (DE)
- Heidelberg University (DE)
- University College London (GB)
- Queen Mary University of London (GB)
- UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology (GB)
- University Hospital Heidelberg (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Kather, Jakob Nikolas
- ORCID
- Venue
- The Journal of Pathology: Clinical Research
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2024-11
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- e70009-e70009
- ISSN
- 2056-4538 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC11540532
- OpenAlex
- W4404093611
- Cited by
- 27
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 1
- FWCI
- 2.52
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- The Journal of Pathology Clinical Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Clinical Center (NIHR203331)
- Bundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz, nukleare Sicherheit und Verbraucherschutz (PEARL 01KD2104C, CAMINO 01EO2101, SWAG 01KD2215, TRANSFORM LIVER 031L0312A, TANGERINE 01KT2302, Come2Data 16DKZ2044A, DEEP‐HCC 031L0315A)
- Leeds Biomedical Research Centre
- H2020 European Research Council (NADIR 101114631)
- HORIZON EUROPE European Innovation Council (ODELIA 101057091, GENIAL 101096312)
- Deutsche Krebshilfe (DECADE 70115166)
- German Academic Exchange Service London (SECAI 57616814)
- National Institutes of Health (EPICO R01 CA263318)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in cancer detection
- Keywords
- large language models, neuropathology, central nervous system tumors, histopathology reports, retrieval-augmented generation, GPT-4o, Claude 3.5 Sonnet, Llama 3, neuro-oncology, diagnostic support tool
- MeSH terms
- Neuropathology, Humans, Natural Language Processing, Central Nervous System Neoplasms
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review