Deriving Real-World Evidence from Non-English Electronic Medical Records in Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer Using Large Language Models

<b>Background/Objectives:</b> Large language models (LLMs) have been proposed as a means of converting unstructured electronic medical records (EMRs) into structured datasets. However, concerns regarding the reliability of these models in non-English clinical text and their capacity to generate novel insights remain unresolved. We aimed to utilize an LLM to identify a hypothetical "Luminal B poor-prognosis" breast cancer subgroup (LPP) based on progesterone receptor (PR), the Ki-67 proliferation index, and grade characteristics, while concurrently validating the LLM's accuracy. <b>Methods:</b> We retrospectively compiled the EMRs on 7756 female breast cancer patients from five Moscow oncology centers. An LLM with a domain-engineered prompt extracted eight clinicopathological variables (Ki-67, estrogen receptor (ER)/PR Allred status, HER2 status, grade, relapse dates, and multiple primaries). The accuracy of the model was validated in 366 randomly sampled cases against oncologist annotations using Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) and weighted κ. Following data post-processing, the complete-case cohort (<i>n</i> = 2347) and the HR+/HER2- stage I-III sub-cohort (<i>n</i> = 1419) were analyzed. Survival was estimated with Kaplan-Meier/log-rank and modeled with Cox regression (adjusted for age, stage, and treatment). Ki-67 was modeled continuously; prespecified LPP definitions were compared. <b>Results:</b> LLM-human agreement was high (Ki-67 ICC = 0.882; grade κ = 0.887; ER κ = 0.997; PR κ = 0.975; HER2 κ = 0.935). Date extraction was characterized by a high degree of missing data. In HR+/HER2- stage I-III disease, ER < 5 was non-prognostic; however, PR < 4 and Ki-67 ≥ 40% were indicative of inferior survival (HR 2.25 and 1.85). The most effective LPP definition (PR < 4 and Ki-67 ≥ 40%) identified a subgroup (~5.3%) of patients with markedly poorer outcomes (age, stage, and treatment adjusted HR 2.60, 95% CI 1.53-4.43) compared to the Luminal B (HER2-) subgroup. <b>Conclusions:</b> The developed LLM has demonstrated the ability to reliably structure non-English EMRs and enable discovery of clinically meaningful subgroups. The discovered LPP phenotype defines a small, high-risk subset warranting external validation. Given the retrospective, single-system design of the study, it is imperative to interpret the discovered phenotype features as hypothesis-generating, rather than as definitive evidence.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Cancers
Published
2025-11-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers17233836
Primary Topic
Breast Cancer Treatment Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Deriving Real-World Evidence from Non-English Electronic Medical Records in Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer Using Large Language Models

Polina Shilo, Olga Rakitina, Alexander Gordeev, I. E. Khatkov et al.
Cancers
Breast Cancer Treatment Studies
article

Deriving Real-World Evidence from Non-English Electronic Medical Records in Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer Using Large Language Models

Polina Shilo, Olga Rakitina, Alexander Gordeev, I. E. Khatkov, Katerina Grechukhina, Sofia A. Kondratieva, Lyudmila Zhukova, В. И. Евдокимов, Daur Meretukov, D. A. Didych
article en

Abstract

<b>Background/Objectives:</b> Large language models (LLMs) have been proposed as a means of converting unstructured electronic medical records (EMRs) into structured datasets. However, concerns regarding the reliability of these models in non-English clinical text and their capacity to generate novel insights remain unresolved. We aimed to utilize an LLM to identify a hypothetical "Luminal B poor-prognosis" breast cancer subgroup (LPP) based on progesterone receptor (PR), the Ki-67 proliferation index, and grade characteristics, while concurrently validating the LLM's accuracy. <b>Methods:</b> We retrospectively compiled the EMRs on 7756 female breast cancer patients from five Moscow oncology centers. An LLM with a domain-engineered prompt extracted eight clinicopathological variables (Ki-67, estrogen receptor (ER)/PR Allred status, HER2 status, grade, relapse dates, and multiple primaries). The accuracy of the model was validated in 366 randomly sampled cases against oncologist annotations using Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) and weighted κ. Following data post-processing, the complete-case cohort (<i>n</i> = 2347) and the HR+/HER2- stage I-III sub-cohort (<i>n</i> = 1419) were analyzed. Survival was estimated with Kaplan-Meier/log-rank and modeled with Cox regression (adjusted for age, stage, and treatment). Ki-67 was modeled continuously; prespecified LPP definitions were compared. <b>Results:</b> LLM-human agreement was high (Ki-67 ICC = 0.882; grade κ = 0.887; ER κ = 0.997; PR κ = 0.975; HER2 κ = 0.935). Date extraction was characterized by a high degree of missing data. In HR+/HER2- stage I-III disease, ER < 5 was non-prognostic; however, PR < 4 and Ki-67 ≥ 40% were indicative of inferior survival (HR 2.25 and 1.85). The most effective LPP definition (PR < 4 and Ki-67 ≥ 40%) identified a subgroup (~5.3%) of patients with markedly poorer outcomes (age, stage, and treatment adjusted HR 2.60, 95% CI 1.53-4.43) compared to the Luminal B (HER2-) subgroup. <b>Conclusions:</b> The developed LLM has demonstrated the ability to reliably structure non-English EMRs and enable discovery of clinically meaningful subgroups. The discovered LPP phenotype defines a small, high-risk subset warranting external validation. Given the retrospective, single-system design of the study, it is imperative to interpret the discovered phenotype features as hypothesis-generating, rather than as definitive evidence.

CancersVol. 17(23)
Moscow Clinical Scientific Center (RU), Russian Cancer Research Center NN Blokhin (RU), Institute of Bioorganic Chemistry (RU), Education Trust (US), Comet (Russia) (RU), Saint Petersburg State Pediatric Medical University (RU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 53%
Breast Cancer Treatment Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.