Poster Session I - A55 PERFORMANCE OF LARGE LANGUAGE MODELS IN THE OPTICAL DIAGNOSIS OF COLORECTAL POLYPS

Abstract Background Optical diagnosis allows for rapid endoscopic decision-making, but many practitioners are inadequately trained. Large language models, such as Anthropic’s Claude Opus 4, have not been evaluated in their ability to apply the NICE or JNET classification systems to colorectal polyps to more reliably predict lesion histologies. Additionally, there is a limited reference base for ideal prompting strategies in gastrointestinal endoscopy. Aims The diagnostic accuracy of multimodal large language models (MLLMs) in classifying colorectal polyps and predicting histology will be comparable to societal (ASGE and ESGE) guidelines and to that of traditional computer-aided diagnostic systems. Methods We conducted a retrospective diagnostic accuracy study using the PRIME dataset, a curated set of white light and narrow-band imaging (NBI) images. We evaluated Claude Opus 4, Google Gemini 2.5 Pro, GPT-o3, GPT-4o, and GPT-5. For Paris, Narrow-band Imaging Colorectal Endoscopic (NICE), and classifications and predicted histology, we calculated percent correct scores and accuracy of each MLLM compared to expert responses for 132 cases. For the Japanese NBI Expert Team (JNET) classification, we analyzed 82 cases. We calculated accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values. Cochran’s Q and McNemar’s Test were used to determine differences between the predicted values of each MLLM. Results Claude Opus 4 and GPT-5 had significantly higher percent correct scores than other MLLMs at 41.7%, using Paris classification. The highest percent correct score range among all the classifications was NICE, which had a range of 78.0% to 84.1%. The accuracy scores among MLLMs were >80% for all models for neoplastic vs. non-neoplastic polyps. Conclusions Claude Opus 4 and Gemini 2.5 Pro showed the highest accuracy in differentiating colorectal polyp subtypes, performing closest to expert consensus. Sensitivity and specificity, however, did not meet ESGE standards, highlighting the need for prospective multicenter trials and the design of human-in-the-loop workflows before clinical deployment. Funding Agencies Pialis Family Chair in Education

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology
Published
2026-02-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/jcag/gwaf042.055
Primary Topic
Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Poster Session I - A55 PERFORMANCE OF LARGE LANGUAGE MODELS IN THE OPTICAL DIAGNOSIS OF COLORECTAL POLYPS

Rishad Khan, Robert Bechara, Nikko Gimpaya, W T Tran et al.
Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology
Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
article

Poster Session I - A55 PERFORMANCE OF LARGE LANGUAGE MODELS IN THE OPTICAL DIAGNOSIS OF COLORECTAL POLYPS

Rishad Khan, Robert Bechara, Nikko Gimpaya, W T Tran, C M Walsh, S Grover, J C Vences, D Von Renteln
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background Optical diagnosis allows for rapid endoscopic decision-making, but many practitioners are inadequately trained. Large language models, such as Anthropic’s Claude Opus 4, have not been evaluated in their ability to apply the NICE or JNET classification systems to colorectal polyps to more reliably predict lesion histologies. Additionally, there is a limited reference base for ideal prompting strategies in gastrointestinal endoscopy. Aims The diagnostic accuracy of multimodal large language models (MLLMs) in classifying colorectal polyps and predicting histology will be comparable to societal (ASGE and ESGE) guidelines and to that of traditional computer-aided diagnostic systems. Methods We conducted a retrospective diagnostic accuracy study using the PRIME dataset, a curated set of white light and narrow-band imaging (NBI) images. We evaluated Claude Opus 4, Google Gemini 2.5 Pro, GPT-o3, GPT-4o, and GPT-5. For Paris, Narrow-band Imaging Colorectal Endoscopic (NICE), and classifications and predicted histology, we calculated percent correct scores and accuracy of each MLLM compared to expert responses for 132 cases. For the Japanese NBI Expert Team (JNET) classification, we analyzed 82 cases. We calculated accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values. Cochran’s Q and McNemar’s Test were used to determine differences between the predicted values of each MLLM. Results Claude Opus 4 and GPT-5 had significantly higher percent correct scores than other MLLMs at 41.7%, using Paris classification. The highest percent correct score range among all the classifications was NICE, which had a range of 78.0% to 84.1%. The accuracy scores among MLLMs were >80% for all models for neoplastic vs. non-neoplastic polyps. Conclusions Claude Opus 4 and Gemini 2.5 Pro showed the highest accuracy in differentiating colorectal polyp subtypes, performing closest to expert consensus. Sensitivity and specificity, however, did not meet ESGE standards, highlighting the need for prospective multicenter trials and the design of human-in-the-loop workflows before clinical deployment. Funding Agencies Pialis Family Chair in Education

Journal of the Canadian Association of GastroenterologyVol. 9(Supplement_1)
University of Calgary (CA), Scarborough Health Network (CA), Scarborough General Hospital (GB), Hospital for Sick Children (CA), Kingston Health Sciences Centre (CA), Université de Montréal (CA)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 57%
Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
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.