SEETrials: Leveraging Large Language Models for Safety and Efficacy Extraction in Oncology Clinical Trials.

Background: Initial insights into oncology clinical trial outcomes are often gleaned manually from conference abstracts. We aimed to develop an automated system to extract safety and efficacy information from study abstracts with high precision and fine granularity, transforming them into computable data for timely clinical decision-making. Methods: We collected clinical trial abstracts from key conferences and PubMed (2012-2023). The SEETrials system was developed with four modules: preprocessing, prompt modeling, knowledge ingestion and postprocessing. We evaluated the system's performance qualitatively and quantitatively and assessed its generalizability across different cancer types- multiple myeloma (MM), breast, lung, lymphoma, and leukemia. Furthermore, the efficacy and safety of innovative therapies, including CAR-T, bispecific antibodies, and antibody-drug conjugates (ADC), in MM were analyzed across a large scale of clinical trial studies. Results: SEETrials achieved high precision (0.958), recall (sensitivity) (0.944), and F1 score (0.951) across 70 data elements present in the MM trial studies Generalizability tests on four additional cancers yielded precision, recall, and F1 scores within the 0.966-0.986 range. Variation in the distribution of safety and efficacy-related entities was observed across diverse therapies, with certain adverse events more common in specific treatments. Comparative performance analysis using overall response rate (ORR) and complete response (CR) highlighted differences among therapies: CAR-T (ORR: 88%, 95% CI: 84-92%; CR: 95%, 95% CI: 53-66%), bispecific antibodies (ORR: 64%, 95% CI: 55-73%; CR: 27%, 95% CI: 16-37%), and ADC (ORR: 51%, 95% CI: 37-65%; CR: 26%, 95% CI: 1-51%). Notable study heterogeneity was identified (>75% I 2 heterogeneity index scores) across several outcome entities analyzed within therapy subgroups. Conclusion: SEETrials demonstrated highly accurate data extraction and versatility across different therapeutics and various cancer domains. Its automated processing of large datasets facilitates nuanced data comparisons, promoting the swift and effective dissemination of clinical insights.

An Ailment with Which I Will Contend: A Narrative Review of 5000 Years of Esophagogastric Cancers and Their Treatments, with Special Emphasis on Recent Advances in Immunotherapeutics.

Esophagogastric cancers are among the most common and deadly cancers worldwide. This review traces their chronology from 3000 BCE to the present. The first several thousand years were devoted to palliation, before advances in operative technique and technology led to the first curative surgery in 1913. Systemic therapies were introduced in 1910, and radiotherapy shortly thereafter. Operative technique improved massively over the 20th century, with operative mortality rates reducing from over 50% in 1933 to less than 5% by 1981. In addition to important roles in palliation, endoscopy became a key nonsurgical curative option for patients with limited-stage disease by the 1990s. The first nonrandomized studies on combination therapies (chemotherapy ± radiation ± surgery) were reported in the early 1980s, with survival benefit only for subsets of patients. Randomized trials over the next decades had similar overall results, with increasing nuance. Disparate conclusions led to regional variation in global practice. Starting with the first FDA approval in 2017, multiple immunotherapies now encompass more indications and earlier lines of therapy. As standards of care incorporate these effective yet expensive therapies, care must be given to disparities and methods for increasing access.

A geno-clinical decision model for the diagnosis of myelodysplastic syndromes.

The differential diagnosis of myeloid malignancies is challenging and subject to interobserver variability. We used clinical and next-generation sequencing (NGS) data to develop a machine learning model for the diagnosis of myeloid malignancies independent of bone marrow biopsy data based on a 3-institution, international cohort of patients. The model achieves high performance, with model interpretations indicating that it relies on factors similar to those used by clinicians. In addition, we describe associations between NGS findings and clinically important phenotypes and introduce the use of machine learning algorithms to elucidate clinicogenomic relationships.

Personalized Prediction Model to Risk Stratify Patients With Myelodysplastic Syndromes.

PURPOSE: Patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) have a survival that can range from months to decades. Prognostic systems that incorporate advanced analytics of clinical, pathologic, and molecular data have the potential to more accurately and dynamically predict survival in patients receiving various therapies. METHODS: A total of 1,471 MDS patients with comprehensively annotated clinical and molecular data were included in a training cohort and analyzed using machine learning techniques. A random survival algorithm was used to build a prognostic model, which was then validated in external cohorts. The accuracy of the proposed model, compared with other established models, was assessed using a concordance (c)index. RESULTS: The median age for the training cohort was 71 years. Commonly mutated genes included SF3B1, TET2, and ASXL1. The algorithm identified chromosomal karyotype, platelet, hemoglobin levels, bone marrow blast percentage, age, other clinical variables, seven discrete gene mutations, and mutation number as having prognostic impact on overall and leukemia-free survivals. The model was validated in an independent external cohort of 465 patients, a cohort of patients with MDS treated in a prospective clinical trial, a cohort of patients with paired samples at different time points during the disease course, and a cohort of patients who underwent hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation. CONCLUSION: A personalized prediction model on the basis of clinical and genomic data outperformed established prognostic models in MDS. The new model was dynamic, predicting survival and leukemia transformation probabilities at different time points that are unique for a given patient, and can upstage and downstage patients into more appropriate risk categories.

Policy Implications of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Diabetes Management.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Machine learning (ML) is increasingly being studied for the screening, diagnosis, and management of diabetes and its complications. Although various models of ML have been developed, most have not led to practical solutions for real-world problems. There has been a disconnect between ML developers, regulatory bodies, health services researchers, clinicians, and patients in their efforts. Our aim is to review the current status of ML in various aspects of diabetes care and identify key challenges that must be overcome to leverage ML to its full potential. RECENT FINDINGS: ML has led to impressive progress in development of automated insulin delivery systems and diabetic retinopathy screening tools. Compared with these, use of ML in other aspects of diabetes is still at an early stage. The Food & Drug Administration (FDA) is adopting some innovative models to help bring technologies to the market in an expeditious and safe manner. ML has great potential in managing diabetes and the future is in furthering the partnership of regulatory bodies with health service researchers, clinicians, developers, and patients to improve the outcomes of populations and individual patients with diabetes.