[Application analysis of the artificial intelligence model DeepSeek in breast cancer treatment decision-making]

Objective: To evaluate the accuracy and feasibility of applying the DeepSeek artificial intelligence model in clinical decision-making for breast cancer by comparing its recommendations with the diagnosis and treatment plans formulated by multi-disciplinary team (MDT). Methods: A total of 163 breast cancer patients, who were given detailed treatment plans via MDT at Shandong Cancer Hospital and Institute between February 11, 2025 and February 24, 2025 and were scheduled to undergo anti-tumor treatment, were included in the study. The patients' medical records were meticulously organized to include details such as gender, age, menopausal status, imaging examination results, pathological diagnosis, molecular subtyping, previous treatment regimens and treatment course, recurrence, and metastasis. Personal identifiers, including patient names and medical record numbers, were anonymized, and the data were submitted to DeepSeek. The 'Deep Thinking R1' mode was selected to derive the treatment plans. Two senior breast cancer clinical experts independently compared the treatment plans provided by DeepSeek with the MDT treatment plans, assessed their consistency, and assigned scores accordingly. Results: DeepSeek provided treatment plans for each patient in under 20 seconds. Two experts assessed the final consistency between DeepSeek's treatment plans and those of the MDT, rating them as follows: 0 point for 15 cases, 1 point for 28 cases, 2 points for 79 cases, and 3 points for 41 cases. The percentage of patients for whom DeepSeek's treatment plans were entirely consistent with the MDT treatment plans was 25.2% (41/163). Among 96 patients for whom the purpose was to assist in treatment decision-making, the overall error rate of DeepSeek's recommendations was 46.8% (45/96). Conclusion: Compared with the MDT diagnosis and treatment plans, DeepSeek's opinions on the overall treatment decision of breast cancer have certain differences, and they need to be used in clinical practice under the guidance of professional identification.