Comparison of artificial intelligence and multidisciplinary team recommendations in the management of colorectal cancer liver metastases

Multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) are central to treatment planning for colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRCLM) but require time and consistent access to expertise. Chat-based large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT can generate recommendations from written clinical summaries; however, their concordance with MDT decisions in CRCLM is not well characterized. We conducted a single-center retrospective concordance study of 30 consecutive CRCLM cases discussed at an MDT. ChatGPT was provided a standardized anonymized text synopsis (without direct imaging access) and asked for management recommendations under two a priori conditions: (1) baseline synopsis only, and (2) a conditional query in which resectability status was explicitly specified. Each case and condition was queried three independent times in separate sessions using identical prompts; outputs were mapped to predefined management categories. Agreement between the final LLM recommendation and MDT decisions was assessed using percent agreement and Cohen's kappa. Across repeated runs, the LLM assigned the same management category in all cases (within-model consistency 100%, 3/3) for both querying conditions. In the baseline condition, agreement with MDT decisions was 66.7% (20/30; Cohen's kappa = 0.606, moderate agreement). In the conditional resectability-specified condition, agreement was 93.3% (28/30; Cohen's kappa = 0.924, very good agreement). Baseline discordant cases were characterized by conservative model outputs, including recommendations for systemic therapy and/or additional diagnostic work-up; only two cases remained discordant after resectability was specified. A chat-based LLM showed moderate concordance with unanimous MDT recommendations from minimal case summaries and very good concordance when resectability status was explicitly specified. These findings support feasibility as a supervised decision-support adjunct, but do not establish clinical benefit; prospective outcome-based validation is required.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scientific Reports
Published
2026-02-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-38449-z
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of artificial intelligence and multidisciplinary team recommendations in the management of colorectal cancer liver metastases

Tahsin Çolak, Cumhur Özcan, Simge Tuna, Uğfe Kuyucuoğlu et al.
Scientific Reports
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
article

Comparison of artificial intelligence and multidisciplinary team recommendations in the management of colorectal cancer liver metastases

Tahsin Çolak, Cumhur Özcan, Simge Tuna, Uğfe Kuyucuoğlu, Hilmi Bozkurt, M Yılmaz, Najmaddın Abbaslı
article en

Abstract

Multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) are central to treatment planning for colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRCLM) but require time and consistent access to expertise. Chat-based large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT can generate recommendations from written clinical summaries; however, their concordance with MDT decisions in CRCLM is not well characterized. We conducted a single-center retrospective concordance study of 30 consecutive CRCLM cases discussed at an MDT. ChatGPT was provided a standardized anonymized text synopsis (without direct imaging access) and asked for management recommendations under two a priori conditions: (1) baseline synopsis only, and (2) a conditional query in which resectability status was explicitly specified. Each case and condition was queried three independent times in separate sessions using identical prompts; outputs were mapped to predefined management categories. Agreement between the final LLM recommendation and MDT decisions was assessed using percent agreement and Cohen's kappa. Across repeated runs, the LLM assigned the same management category in all cases (within-model consistency 100%, 3/3) for both querying conditions. In the baseline condition, agreement with MDT decisions was 66.7% (20/30; Cohen's kappa = 0.606, moderate agreement). In the conditional resectability-specified condition, agreement was 93.3% (28/30; Cohen's kappa = 0.924, very good agreement). Baseline discordant cases were characterized by conservative model outputs, including recommendations for systemic therapy and/or additional diagnostic work-up; only two cases remained discordant after resectability was specified. A chat-based LLM showed moderate concordance with unanimous MDT recommendations from minimal case summaries and very good concordance when resectability status was explicitly specified. These findings support feasibility as a supervised decision-support adjunct, but do not establish clinical benefit; prospective outcome-based validation is required.

Scientific ReportsVol. 16(1)
Mersin Üniversitesi (TR)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 69%
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
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.