Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 17, 2026

A Metadata Extraction Approach for Clinical Case Reports to Enable Advanced Understanding of Biomedical Concepts
Published on: September 20, 2018
Automated extraction of fluoropyrimidine treatment and treatment-related toxicities from clinical notes using natural
Xizhi Wu1, Madeline S Kreider2, Philip E Empey2
1Department of Health Information Management, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Objective:
Fluoropyrimidines are widely prescribed for colorectal and breast cancers, but are associated with toxicities such as hand-foot syndrome and cardiotoxicity. Since toxicity documentation is often embedded in clinical notes, we aimed to develop and evaluate natural language processing (NLP) methods to extract treatment and toxicity information.
Materials And Methods:
We constructed a gold-standard dataset of 236 clinical notes from 204,165 adult oncology patients. Domain experts annotated categories related to treatment regimens and toxicities. We developed rule-based, machine learning-based (Random Forest [RF], Support Vector Machine [SVM], Logistic Regression [LR]), deep learning-based (BERT, ClinicalBERT), and large language models (LLM)-based NLP approaches (zero-shot and error analysis prompting). A 5-fold cross validation were conducted to validate each model.
Results:
Error analysis prompting achieved optimal precision, recall, and F1 scores for treatment (F1 = 1.000) and toxicities extraction (F1 = 0.965), whereas zero-shot perform moderately (treatment F1 = 0.889, toxicities extraction F1 = 0.854) Rule-based reached F1 = 1.000 for treatment and F1 = 0.904 for toxicities extraction. LR and SVM ranked second and fourth for toxicities extraction (LR F1 = 0.914, SVM F1 = 0.903). Deep learning and RF underperformed, with performance of BERT reached F1 = 0.792 for treatment and F1 = 0.837 for toxicities extraction.,ClinicalBERT reached F1 = 0.797 for treatment and F1 = 0.884 for toxicities extraction). RF reached F1 = 0.745 for treatment and F1 = 0.853 for toxicities extraction.
Discussion:
LMM-based error analysis outperformed all others, followed by machine learning methods. Machine learning and deep learning methods were limited by small training data and showed limited generalizability, particularly for rare categories.
Conclusion:
LLM-based error analysis most effectively extracted fluoropyrimidine treatment and toxicity information from clinical notes, and has strong potential to support oncology research and pharmacovigilance.
More Related Videos
04:09Predicting Treatment Response to Image-Guided Therapies Using Machine Learning: An Example for Trans-Arterial Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Published on: October 10, 2018
06:21Author Spotlight: Genetic Profiling for Fluorouracil Response in Gastric Cancer
Published on: May 10, 2024
Related Concept Videos
Treatment Resistant Cancers
Anticholinesterase Agents: Poisoning and Treatment
Irreversible agents form a strong bond with the cholinesterase enzyme, making it inactive. The breakdown of the phosphorylated enzyme is...
Therapeutic Drug Monitoring: Drug Analysis Methods
Combination Therapies and Personalized Medicine
The combination of the drug acetazolamide and sulforaphane is a good example of combination therapy to treat cancer. The cells in the interior of a large tumor often die due to the hypoxic and...
Enhanced Elimination of Poison
Antidotes serve a crucial role in counteracting the effects of poison by inhibiting enzymes responsible for producing harmful drug metabolites. In some cases, these toxic metabolites can be neutralized by endogenous cosubstrates, which are maintained at specific concentrations to prevent interaction with cellular macromolecules and subsequent cell death.
Renal excretion is the...
Targeted Cancer Therapies
There are several types of targeted therapies against...