Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Nov 7;7(1):312.
doi: 10.1038/s41746-024-01302-6.

Automated decision making in Barrett's oesophagus: development and deployment of a natural language processing tool

Affiliations

Automated decision making in Barrett's oesophagus: development and deployment of a natural language processing tool

Agathe Zecevic et al. NPJ Digit Med. .

Abstract

Manual decisions regarding the timing of surveillance endoscopy for premalignant Barrett's oesophagus (BO) is error-prone. This leads to inefficient resource usage and safety risks. To automate decision-making, we fine-tuned Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT) models to categorize BO length (EndoBERT) and worst histopathological grade (PathBERT) on 4,831 endoscopy and 4,581 pathology reports from Guy's and St Thomas' Hospital (GSTT). The accuracies for EndoBERT test sets from GSTT, King's College Hospital (KCH), and Sandwell and West Birmingham Hospitals (SWB) were 0.95, 0.86, and 0.99, respectively. Average accuracies for PathBERT were 0.93, 0.91, and 0.92, respectively. A retrospective analysis of 1640 GSTT reports revealed a 27% discrepancy between endoscopists' decisions and model recommendations. This study underscores the development and deployment of NLP-based software in BO surveillance, demonstrating high performance at multiple sites. The analysis emphasizes the potential efficiency of automation in enhancing precision and guideline adherence in clinical decision-making.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1. Cohort selection process for both model training and test sets.
This figure presents a consort diagram detailing the process used for selecting patient cohorts for the training set and illustrating the distribution of test samples across different trusts: GSTT, KCH and SWB.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2. EndominerAI end-to-end data pipeline.
The diagram presents the comprehensive data pipeline of EndominerAI, showcasing the sequence from data preprocessing to follow-up prediction. After data preprocessing, the data is submitted to EndoBERT (for endoscopic data) or PathBERT (for histopathological data), the output of these models (diamonds) is then passed in to a rule-based algorithm to determine follow up timing.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3. EndominerAI architecture in hospital environment.
This figure displays the operational framework of EndominerAI in a hospital setting. It shows how data is extracted from hospital databases, processed and returned to the user.

References

    1. Robertson, C. S., Mayberry, J. F., Nicholson, D. A., James, P. D. & Atkinson, M. Value of endoscopic surveillance in the detection of neoplastic change in Barrett’s oesophagus. Br. J. Surg.75, 760–763 (2005). - PubMed
    1. Hameeteman, W., Tytgat, G. N. J., Houthoff, H. J. & van den Tweel, J. G. Barrett’s Esophagus; Development of Dysplasia and Adenocarcinoma. Gastroenterology96, 1249–1256 (1989). - PubMed
    1. Bhat, S. et al. Risk of Malignant Progression in Barrett’s Esophagus Patients: Results from a Large Population-Based Study. JNCI J. Natl Cancer Inst.103, 1049–1057 (2011). - PMC - PubMed
    1. Fitzgerald, R. C. et al. British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines on the diagnosis and management of Barrett’s oesophagus. Gut.63, 7–42 (2014). - PubMed
    1. Abrams, J. A. et al. Adherence to Biopsy Guidelines for Barrett’s Esophagus Surveillance in the Community Setting in the United States. Clin. Gastroenterol. Hepatol.7, 736–742 (2009). - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources