Accuracy of GPT-4 in histopathological image detection and classification of colorectal adenomas.

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q2 PATHOLOGY
Thiyaphat Laohawetwanit, Chutimon Namboonlue, Sompon Apornvirat
{"title":"Accuracy of GPT-4 in histopathological image detection and classification of colorectal adenomas.","authors":"Thiyaphat Laohawetwanit, Chutimon Namboonlue, Sompon Apornvirat","doi":"10.1136/jcp-2023-209304","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>To evaluate the accuracy of Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer (ChatGPT) powered by GPT-4 in histopathological image detection and classification of colorectal adenomas using the diagnostic consensus provided by pathologists as a reference standard.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A study was conducted with 100 colorectal polyp photomicrographs, comprising an equal number of adenomas and non-adenomas, classified by two pathologists. These images were analysed by classic GPT-4 for 1 time in October 2023 and custom GPT-4 for 20 times in December 2023. GPT-4's responses were compared against the reference standard through statistical measures to evaluate its proficiency in histopathological diagnosis, with the pathologists further assessing the model's descriptive accuracy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>GPT-4 demonstrated a median sensitivity of 74% and specificity of 36% for adenoma detection. The median accuracy of polyp classification varied, ranging from 16% for non-specific changes to 36% for tubular adenomas. Its diagnostic consistency, indicated by low kappa values ranging from 0.06 to 0.11, suggested only poor to slight agreement. All of the microscopic descriptions corresponded with their diagnoses. GPT-4 also commented about the limitations in its diagnoses (eg, slide diagnosis best done by pathologists, the inadequacy of single-image diagnostic conclusions, the need for clinical data and a higher magnification view).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>GPT-4 showed high sensitivity but low specificity in detecting adenomas and varied accuracy for polyp classification. However, its diagnostic consistency was low. This artificial intelligence tool acknowledged its diagnostic limitations, emphasising the need for a pathologist's expertise and additional clinical context.</p>","PeriodicalId":15391,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Pathology","volume":" ","pages":"202-207"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Pathology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/jcp-2023-209304","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims: To evaluate the accuracy of Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer (ChatGPT) powered by GPT-4 in histopathological image detection and classification of colorectal adenomas using the diagnostic consensus provided by pathologists as a reference standard.

Methods: A study was conducted with 100 colorectal polyp photomicrographs, comprising an equal number of adenomas and non-adenomas, classified by two pathologists. These images were analysed by classic GPT-4 for 1 time in October 2023 and custom GPT-4 for 20 times in December 2023. GPT-4's responses were compared against the reference standard through statistical measures to evaluate its proficiency in histopathological diagnosis, with the pathologists further assessing the model's descriptive accuracy.

Results: GPT-4 demonstrated a median sensitivity of 74% and specificity of 36% for adenoma detection. The median accuracy of polyp classification varied, ranging from 16% for non-specific changes to 36% for tubular adenomas. Its diagnostic consistency, indicated by low kappa values ranging from 0.06 to 0.11, suggested only poor to slight agreement. All of the microscopic descriptions corresponded with their diagnoses. GPT-4 also commented about the limitations in its diagnoses (eg, slide diagnosis best done by pathologists, the inadequacy of single-image diagnostic conclusions, the need for clinical data and a higher magnification view).

Conclusions: GPT-4 showed high sensitivity but low specificity in detecting adenomas and varied accuracy for polyp classification. However, its diagnostic consistency was low. This artificial intelligence tool acknowledged its diagnostic limitations, emphasising the need for a pathologist's expertise and additional clinical context.

GPT-4 在大肠腺瘤组织病理图像检测和分类中的准确性。
目的:以病理学家提供的诊断共识为参考标准,评估由 GPT-4 支持的 Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer(ChatGPT)在结直肠腺瘤的组织病理学图像检测和分类中的准确性:研究使用了 100 张结直肠息肉显微照片,其中腺瘤和非腺瘤的数量相等,并由两名病理学家进行了分类。这些图像在 2023 年 10 月用经典 GPT-4 分析了 1 次,在 2023 年 12 月用定制 GPT-4 分析了 20 次。通过统计方法将 GPT-4 的反应与参考标准进行比较,以评估其在组织病理学诊断中的熟练程度,病理学家则进一步评估模型的描述准确性:结果:GPT-4 对腺瘤检测的灵敏度中位数为 74%,特异性为 36%。息肉分类的中位准确率各不相同,非特异性变化为 16%,管状腺瘤为 36%。卡帕值较低,从 0.06 到 0.11 不等,表明诊断一致性较差。所有的显微描述都与其诊断相符。GPT-4 还对其诊断的局限性进行了评论(例如,切片诊断最好由病理学家完成,单张图像诊断结论不充分,需要临床数据和更高放大倍数的视图):结论:GPT-4 检测腺瘤的灵敏度较高,但特异性较低,对息肉分类的准确性也不尽相同。然而,其诊断一致性较低。这种人工智能工具承认其诊断局限性,强调需要病理学家的专业知识和额外的临床背景。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
2.90%
发文量
113
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Clinical Pathology is a leading international journal covering all aspects of pathology. Diagnostic and research areas covered include histopathology, virology, haematology, microbiology, cytopathology, chemical pathology, molecular pathology, forensic pathology, dermatopathology, neuropathology and immunopathology. Each issue contains Reviews, Original articles, Short reports, Correspondence and more.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信