AI-enabled clinical decision support in breast cancer care: a blinded multicenter benchmarking study comparing medically specialized with a general-purpose system
Jul 2026· Journal of medical systems· Vol 50· 0 citations· 38 references
MedicineComputer Science
TL;DR
The results indicate that while regulatory clearance and domain specialization address key requirements for AI-enabled clinical decision support systems, these factors alone do not translate into superior performance in breast cancer care.
Abstract
Medically specialized AI systems that have obtained regulatory clearance as medical devices can be deployed for patient-specific clinical decision support under defined compliance requirements. However, it remains unclear whether medical specialization and regulatory status translate into higher-quality breast cancer treatment recommendations than those produced by a general-purpose large language model (LLM). This blinded, multicenter study compared the performance of two medically specialized AI systems with a general-purpose model in breast cancer care. Two medically specialized (Prof. Valmed and OpenEvidence) and one general-purpose system (ChatGPT-5 Thinking) were prompted to generate treatment plans for 20 standardized breast cancer patient cases. Outputs were rated and ranked by blinded, board-certified breast cancer specialists from seven university breast cancer centers for safety, guideline adherence, medical adequacy, completeness, overall quality, and logical coherence. Statistical analyses comprised descriptive statistics, inter-rater reliability assessment, non-parametric performance comparisons of rating and ranking outcomes, and correlation analyses. Mean (± standard deviation) processing time for ChatGPT-5 Thinking (159 ± 58 s) was more than fourfold higher than that of Prof. Valmed (35 ± 4) and OpenEvidence (9 ± 1). ChatGPT-5 Thinking achieved significantly higher ratings across all evaluation categories, with no significant differences between the two medically specialized systems. Treatment plans generated by ChatGPT-5 Thinking were ranked as the top choice in 96.4% of rater-case combinations, compared with 3.6% for OpenEvidence, while Prof. Valmed was never ranked first. In this blinded, multicenter evaluation, a general-purpose LLM outperformed two medically specialized, retrieval-augmented systems in generating breast cancer treatment plans across all assessed categories. These results indicate that while regulatory clearance and domain specialization address key requirements for AI-enabled clinical decision support systems, these factors alone do not translate into superior performance in breast cancer care. At present, medically specialized systems may be best used as supportive tools under expert oversight, while further optimization and real-world validation are needed. Clinical trial number: Not applicable
A patient-centric tool to compare patient- and caregiver-level outcomes across common localized PCa management strategies to inform shared decision-making and counseling and supports point-of-care counseling by quantifying patient- and caregiver-relevant tradeoffs in costs, time burden, and functional outcomes across l...
S. Canfield, Betsy J. Lahue, Kristen A. Cribbs· JU Open Plus· 0 citations
In a safety-net oncology setting, her-assisted prescreening was feasible but required manual verification and clinician involvement, which limited its utility as a standalone screening method.
Hussain Alkhafaji, Lindsay Reynolds, Melissa Howell et al.· The Oncologist· 0 citations
No evaluated tool or combination was sufficiently accurate to enable physician-unassisted triage in this setting of patient-initiated text messages in a multi-state Medicaid population.
S. Basu, Sadiq Y. Patel, Parth Sheth et al.· BMC Medical Informatics and...· 0 citations
TrialGPT 2.0 is presented, an AI-assisted clinical trial recommendation system designed for real-world deployment that improves clinician efficiency and identifying frequently overlooked trial opportunities, ultimately helping to expand and accelerate accrual to cancer trials.
Yin Fang, Qiao Jin, Shubo Tian et al.· 0 citations
Current evidence is insufficient to establish improvements in MDT decision quality or patient outcomes, and AI should be regarded as a supervised support tool rather than a replacement for expert multidisciplinary judgment.
A. Nikitaras, S. M. Tsoti, M. Pramateftakis· Frontiers in Oncology· 0 citations
The Belgian-adapted PDA demonstrated satisfactory content validity within the participating Belgian panels and is intended to complement professional counselling and support shared decision-making.
I. Vlerick, G. V. van Ramshorst, D. Van de Putte et al.· Seminars in Oncology Nursing· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.