Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center · 2024
Improving Prediction of Complications Post-Proton Therapy in Lung Cancer Using Large Language Models and Meta-Analysis.
СтатьяМетаанализНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Chao Pei-Ju, Chang Chu-Ho, Wu Jyun-Jie, Liu Yen-Hsien, Shiau Junping, Shih Hsin-Hung, Lin Guang-Zhi, Lee Shen-Hao, Lee Tsair-Fwu
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This study enhances the efficiency of predicting complications in lung cancer patients receiving proton therapy by utilizing large language models (LLMs) and meta-analytical techniques for literature quality assessment.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We integrated systematic reviews with LLM evaluations, sourcing studies from Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus, managed via EndNote X20. Inclusion and exclusion criteria ensured literature relevance. Techniques included meta-analysis, heterogeneity assessment using Cochran's Q test and I2 statistics, and subgroup analyses for different complications. Quality and bias risk were assessed using the PROBAST tool and further analyzed with models such as ChatGPT-4, Llama2-13b, and Llama3-8b. Evaluation metrics included AUC, accuracy, precision, recall, F1 score, and time efficiency (WPM).
RESULTS: The meta-analysis revealed an overall effect size of 0.78 for model predictions, with high heterogeneity observed (I2 = 72.88%, P < 0.001). Subgroup analysis for radiation-induced esophagitis and pneumonitis revealed predictive effect sizes of 0.79 and 0.77, respectively, with a heterogeneity index (I2) of 0%, indicating that there were no significant differences among the models in predicting these specific complications. A literature assessment using LLMs demonstrated that ChatGPT-4 achieved the highest accuracy at 90%, significantly outperforming the Llama3 and Llama2 models, which had accuracies ranging from 44% to 62%. Additionally, LLM evaluations were conducted 3229 times faster than manual assessments were, markedly enhancing both efficiency and accuracy. The risk assessment results identified nine studies as high risk, three as low risk, and one as unknown, confirming the robustness of the ChatGPT-4 across various evaluation metrics.
CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that the integration of large language models with meta-analysis techniques can significantly increase the efficiency of literature evaluations and reduce the time required for assessments, confirming that there are no significant differences among models in predicting post proton therapy complications in lung cancer patients.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We integrated systematic reviews with LLM evaluations, sourcing studies from Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus, managed via EndNote X20. Inclusion and exclusion criteria ensured literature relevance. Techniques included meta-analysis, heterogeneity assessment using Cochran's Q test and I2 statistics, and subgroup analyses for different complications. Quality and bias risk were assessed using the PROBAST tool and further analyzed with models such as ChatGPT-4, Llama2-13b, and Llama3-8b. Evaluation metrics included AUC, accuracy, precision, recall, F1 score, and time efficiency (WPM).
RESULTS: The meta-analysis revealed an overall effect size of 0.78 for model predictions, with high heterogeneity observed (I2 = 72.88%, P < 0.001). Subgroup analysis for radiation-induced esophagitis and pneumonitis revealed predictive effect sizes of 0.79 and 0.77, respectively, with a heterogeneity index (I2) of 0%, indicating that there were no significant differences among the models in predicting these specific complications. A literature assessment using LLMs demonstrated that ChatGPT-4 achieved the highest accuracy at 90%, significantly outperforming the Llama3 and Llama2 models, which had accuracies ranging from 44% to 62%. Additionally, LLM evaluations were conducted 3229 times faster than manual assessments were, markedly enhancing both efficiency and accuracy. The risk assessment results identified nine studies as high risk, three as low risk, and one as unknown, confirming the robustness of the ChatGPT-4 across various evaluation metrics.
CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that the integration of large language models with meta-analysis techniques can significantly increase the efficiency of literature evaluations and reduce the time required for assessments, confirming that there are no significant differences among models in predicting post proton therapy complications in lung cancer patients.