INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Natural language processing (NLP) software programs have been widely developed to transform complex free text into simplified organized data. Potential applications in the field of medicine include automated report summaries, physician alerts, patient repositories, electronic medical record (EMR) billing, and quality metric reports. Despite these prospects and the recent widespread adoption of EMR, NLP has been relatively underutilized. The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of an internally developed NLP program in extracting select pathologic findings from radical prostatectomy specimen reports in the EMR. METHODS: An NLP program was generated by a software engineer to extract key variables from prostatectomy reports in the EMR within our healthcare system, which included the TNM stage, Gleason grade, presence of a tertiary Gleason pattern, histologic subtype, size of dominant tumor nodule, seminal vesicle invasion (SVI), perineural invasion (PNI), angiolymphatic invasion (ALI), extracapsular extension (ECE), and surgical margin status (SMS). The program was validated by comparing NLP results to a gold standard compiled by two blinded manual reviewers for 100 random pathology reports. RESULTS: NLP demonstrated 100% accuracy for identifying the Gleason grade, presence of a tertiary Gleason pattern, SVI, ALI, and ECE. It also demonstrated near-perfect accuracy for extracting histologic subtype (99.0%), PNI (98.9%), TNM stage (98.0%), SMS (97.0%), and dominant tumor size (95.7%). The overall accuracy of NLP was 98.7%. NLP generated a result in <1 second, whereas the manual reviewers averaged 3.2 minutes per report. CONCLUSIONS: This novel program demonstrated high accuracy and efficiency identifying key pathologic details from the prostatectomy report within an EMR system. NLP has the potential to assist urologists by summarizing and highlighting relevant information from verbose pathology reports. It may also facilitate future urologic research through the rapid and automated creation of large databases.
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Natural language processing (NLP) software programs have been widely developed to transform complex free text into simplified organized data. Potential applications in the field of medicine include automated report summaries, physician alerts, patient repositories, electronic medical record (EMR) billing, and quality metric reports. Despite these prospects and the recent widespread adoption of EMR, NLP has been relatively underutilized. The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of an internally developed NLP program in extracting select pathologic findings from radical prostatectomy specimen reports in the EMR. METHODS: An NLP program was generated by a software engineer to extract key variables from prostatectomy reports in the EMR within our healthcare system, which included the TNM stage, Gleason grade, presence of a tertiary Gleason pattern, histologic subtype, size of dominant tumor nodule, seminal vesicle invasion (SVI), perineural invasion (PNI), angiolymphatic invasion (ALI), extracapsular extension (ECE), and surgical margin status (SMS). The program was validated by comparing NLP results to a gold standard compiled by two blinded manual reviewers for 100 random pathology reports. RESULTS: NLP demonstrated 100% accuracy for identifying the Gleason grade, presence of a tertiary Gleason pattern, SVI, ALI, and ECE. It also demonstrated near-perfect accuracy for extracting histologic subtype (99.0%), PNI (98.9%), TNM stage (98.0%), SMS (97.0%), and dominant tumor size (95.7%). The overall accuracy of NLP was 98.7%. NLP generated a result in <1 second, whereas the manual reviewers averaged 3.2 minutes per report. CONCLUSIONS: This novel program demonstrated high accuracy and efficiency identifying key pathologic details from the prostatectomy report within an EMR system. NLP has the potential to assist urologists by summarizing and highlighting relevant information from verbose pathology reports. It may also facilitate future urologic research through the rapid and automated creation of large databases.
Authors: Florian R Schroeck; Olga V Patterson; Patrick R Alba; Erik A Pattison; John D Seigne; Scott L DuVall; Douglas J Robertson; Brenda Sirovich; Philip P Goodney Journal: Urology Date: 2017-09-12 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Anobel Y Odisho; Mark Bridge; Mitchell Webb; Niloufar Ameli; Renu S Eapen; Frank Stauf; Janet E Cowan; Samuel L Washington; Annika Herlemann; Peter R Carroll; Matthew R Cooperberg Journal: JCO Clin Cancer Inform Date: 2019-07
Authors: Selen Bozkurt; Christopher J Magnani; Martin G Seneviratne; James D Brooks; Tina Hernandez-Boussard Journal: Front Digit Health Date: 2022-06-02
Authors: Alexander C Flint; Ronald B Melles; Jeff G Klingman; Sheila L Chan; Vivek A Rao; Andrew L Avins Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2020-08-31 Impact factor: 6.473
Authors: Sajjad Abedian; Evan T Sholle; Prakash M Adekkanattu; Marika M Cusick; Stephanie E Weiner; Jonathan E Shoag; Jim C Hu; Thomas R Campion Journal: JCO Clin Cancer Inform Date: 2021-10
Authors: Abdulrahman K AAlAbdulsalam; Jennifer H Garvin; Andrew Redd; Marjorie E Carter; Carol Sweeny; Stephane M Meystre Journal: AMIA Jt Summits Transl Sci Proc Date: 2018-05-18
Authors: Arika E Wieneke; Erin J A Bowles; David Cronkite; Karen J Wernli; Hongyuan Gao; David Carrell; Diana S M Buist Journal: J Pathol Inform Date: 2015-06-23