Systematic benchmarking demonstrates large language models have not reached the diagnostic accuracy of traditional rare-disease decision support tools

Large language models (LLMs) show promise in supporting differential diagnosis, but their performance is challenging to evaluate due to the unstructured nature of their responses, and their accuracy compared to existing diagnostic tools is not well characterized. To assess the current capabilities of LLMs to diagnose genetic diseases, we benchmarked these models on 5213 previously published case reports using the Phenopacket Schema, the Human Phenotype Ontology and Mondo disease ontology. Prompts generated from each phenopacket were sent to seven LLMs, including four generalist models and three LLMs specialized for medical applications. The same phenopackets were used as input to a widely used diagnostic tool, Exomiser, in phenotype-only mode. The best LLM ranked the correct diagnosis first in 23.6% of cases, whereas Exomiser did so in 35.5% of cases. While the performance of LLMs for supporting differential diagnosis has been improving, it has not reached the level of commonly used traditional bioinformatics tools. Future research is needed to determine the best approach to incorporate LLMs into diagnostic pipelines.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
European Journal of Human Genetics
Published
2026-02-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41431-026-02054-5
Primary Topic
Genomics and Rare Diseases
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Systematic benchmarking demonstrates large language models have not reached the diagnostic accuracy of traditional rare-disease decision support tools

Eric Rasche, Andrew Schmeder, Elena Casiraghi, Yasemin Bridges et al.
European Journal of Human Genetics
Genomics and Rare Diseases
article

Systematic benchmarking demonstrates large language models have not reached the diagnostic accuracy of traditional rare-disease decision support tools

Eric Rasche, Andrew Schmeder, Elena Casiraghi, Yasemin Bridges, Adam S L Graefe, Kyran Wissink, Damian Smedley, Carlo Kroll, Daniel Danis, Daniel Korn, Fengchen Liu, Melissa Haendel, J. Harry Caufield, Julie A. McMurry, Peter N. Robinson, Julius O. B. Jacobsen, Christopher J. Mungall, Leonardo Chimirri, Giorgio Valentini, Michael A. Gargano
article en

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) show promise in supporting differential diagnosis, but their performance is challenging to evaluate due to the unstructured nature of their responses, and their accuracy compared to existing diagnostic tools is not well characterized. To assess the current capabilities of LLMs to diagnose genetic diseases, we benchmarked these models on 5213 previously published case reports using the Phenopacket Schema, the Human Phenotype Ontology and Mondo disease ontology. Prompts generated from each phenopacket were sent to seven LLMs, including four generalist models and three LLMs specialized for medical applications. The same phenopackets were used as input to a widely used diagnostic tool, Exomiser, in phenotype-only mode. The best LLM ranked the correct diagnosis first in 23.6% of cases, whereas Exomiser did so in 35.5% of cases. While the performance of LLMs for supporting differential diagnosis has been improving, it has not reached the level of commonly used traditional bioinformatics tools. Future research is needed to determine the best approach to incorporate LLMs into diagnostic pipelines.

European Journal of Human Genetics
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US), Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (US), Queen Mary University of London (GB), University of Milan (IT), Jackson Laboratory (US), European School of Oncology (IT), Berlin Institute of Health at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin (DE), William Harvey Research Institute (GB)
U.S. Department of Energy, Alexander von Humboldt-Stiftung, National Institutes of Health, Office of Science, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Basic Energy Sciences
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 43%
Genomics and Rare Diseases
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.