Abstract:Background: As artificial intelligence (AI) tools become widely accessible, more patients and medical professionals will turn to them for medical information. Large language models (LLMs), a subset of AI, excel in natural language processing tasks and hold considerable promise for clinical use. Fields such as oncology, in which clinical decisions are highly dependent on a continuous influx of new clinical trial data and evolving guidelines, stand to gain immensely from such advancements. It is therefore of critical importance to benchmark these models and describe their performance characteristics to guide their safe application to clinical oncology. Accordingly, the primary objectives of this work were to conduct comprehensive evaluations of LLMs in the field of oncology and to identify and characterize strategies that medical professionals can use to bolster their confidence in a model's response. Methods: This study tested five publicly available LLMs (LLaMA 1, PaLM 2, Claude-v1, generative pretrained transformer 3.5 [GPT-3.5], and GPT-4) on a comprehensive battery of 2044 oncology questions, including topics from medical oncology, surgical oncology, radiation oncology, medical statistics, medical physics, and cancer biology. Model prompts were presented independently of each other, and each prompt was repeated three times to assess output consistency. For each response, models were instructed to provide a self-appraised confidence score (from 1 to 4). Model performance was also evaluated against a novel validation set comprising 50 oncology questions curated to eliminate any risk of overlap with the data used to train the LLMs. Results: There was significant heterogeneity in performance between models (analysis of variance, P<0.001). Relative to a human benchmark (2013 and 2014 examination results), GPT-4 was the only model to perform above the 50th percentile. Overall, model performance varied as a function of subject area across all models, with worse performance observed in clinical oncology subcategories compared with foundational topics (medical statistics, medical physics, and cancer biology). Within the clinical oncology subdomain, worse performance was observed in female-predominant malignancies. A combination of model selection, prompt repetition, and confidence self-appraisal allowed for the identification of high-performing subgroups of questions with observed accuracies of 81.7 and 81.1% in the Claude-v1 and GPT-4 models, respectively. Evaluation of the novel validation question set produced similar trends in model performance while also highlighting improved performance in newer, centrally hosted models (GPT-4 Turbo and Gemini 1.0 Ultra) and local models (Mixtral 8×7B and LLaMA 2). Conclusions: Of the models tested on a standardized set of oncology questions, GPT-4 was observed to have the highest performance. Although this performance is impressive, all LLMs continue to have clinically significant error rates, including examples of overconfidence and consistent inaccuracies. Given the enthusiasm to integrate these new implementations of AI into clinical practice, continued standardized evaluations of the strengths and limitations of these products will be critical to guide both patients and medical professionals. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center for Research and the Intramural Research Program of the National Institutes of Health; Z99 CA999999.).

Reliability of large language model knowledge across brand and generic cancer drug names

Comparative Evaluation of LLMs in Clinical Oncology

Language Models are Surprisingly Fragile to Drug Names in Biomedical Benchmarks

Leveraging Large Language Models for Decision Support in Personalized Oncology

Large language model use in clinical oncology

Distilling large language models for matching patients to clinical trials

Large language foundation models encode clinical radiation oncology domain knowledge: Performance on the American College of Radiology Standardized Examination.

Leveraging Large Language Models in Gynecologic Oncology: A Systematic Review of Current Applications and Challenges

Large language models for precision oncology: Clinical decision support through expert-guided learning.

Benchmarking a Foundation Large Language Model on its Ability to Relabel Structure Names in Accordance With the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group-263 Report

Optimizing large language models in digestive disease: strategies and challenges to improve clinical outcomes

Unlocking the potential of advanced large language models in medication review and reconciliation: A proof-of-concept investigation

Evaluation of large language model performance on the Biomedical Language Understanding and Reasoning Benchmark

Evaluating large language models on medical, lay language, and self-reported descriptions of genetic conditions

Performance of Large Language Models on Medical Oncology Examination Questions

Biomedical Large Languages Models Seem not to be Superior to Generalist Models on Unseen Medical Data

Enhancing Biomarker-Based Oncology Trial Matching Using Large Language Models

Evaluating Large Language Models in Ophthalmology

Reliability of large language models for advanced head and neck malignancies management: a comparison between ChatGPT 4 and Gemini Advanced

Accuracy and consistency of publicly available Large Language Models as clinical decision support tools for the management of colon cancer