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.).

Large Language Models Fail to Reproduce Level I Recommendations for Breast Radiotherapy

Evaluation of large language models in breast cancer clinical scenarios: A comparative analysis based on ChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4.0, and Claude2

Assessing the performance of large language models (LLMs) in answering medical questions regarding breast cancer in the Chinese context

Comparative Evaluation of LLMs in Clinical Oncology

Large language model (ChatGPT) as a support tool for breast tumor board

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

A Large Language Model Pipeline for Breast Cancer Oncology

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

Evaluating Large Language Models on a Highly-specialized Topic, Radiation Oncology Physics

Large Language Models to Help Appeal Denied Radiotherapy Services

Performance of a trained large language model to provide clinical trial recommendation in a head and neck cancer population.

Assessing Large Language Models for Oncology Data Inference from Radiology Reports

Leveraging Large Language Models for Decision Support in Personalized Oncology

Evaluating text and visual diagnostic capabilities of large language models on questions related to the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System Atlas 5th edition

Exploring the role of artificial intelligence, large language models: Comparing patient‐focused information and clinical decision support capabilities to the gynecologic oncology guidelines

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

Large language models encode medical oncology knowledge: Performance on the ASCO and ESMO examination questions.

RadOnc-GPT: A Large Language Model for Radiation Oncology

Improving Prediction of Complications Post-Proton Therapy in Lung Cancer Using Large Language Models and Meta-Analysis

Abstract 1296: Evaluating the accuracy and reproducibility of ChatGPT models in answering lung cancer patient queries

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