AI-assisted automated abstraction for enhanced patient insights in gastrointestinal cancers.

A Axel Grothey W Wenjun He (Tsinghua Center for Green Chemical Engineering Electrification, Department of Chemical Engineering) Y Yidan Qin (Natera, Inc., Austin, TX) V Vasily N. Aushev H Harendra Guturu (Natera, Inc., Austin, TX) J Jacob Hamblin (Natera, Inc., Austin, TX) P Pamella Tater (Natera, Inc., Austin, TX) R Raven Brothers (Natera, Inc., Austin, TX) E Elizabeth Strojny (Natera, Inc., Austin, TX) P Priyal Patel (mRNA Center of Excellence Sanofi Waltham MA 02451 USA) A Arianna Brisley (Natera, Inc., Austin, TX) T Traci Moreland (Natera, Inc., Austin, TX) J Jenny Park A Alyssa Antonopoulos (Natera, Inc., Austin, TX) A Adham A. Jurdi (Natera, Inc., Austin, TX) S Solomon Moshkevich (Natera, Inc., Austin, TX)

Abstract

843 Background: Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in patients diagnosed with cancer has emerged as a critical biomarker to detect and monitor molecular residual disease for timely decision-making. Currently, medical providers rely on clinical reports that require manual data curation to understand a patient’s medical history and make informed treatment recommendations. Here, we implemented a novel approach that automates clinical data abstraction, combined with a user-friendly interface, resulting in an interactive overview plot, readily available to medical providers for critical decision-making. Methods: To evaluate the performance of Natera’s AI-assisted automated abstraction process, we developed a data dictionary specific to gastrointestinal cancers that covered 13 event types across six categories: Patient Information, Condition, Procedure, Biomarker, Outcome, and Clinical Follow-up. In a reference cohort of 50 patients, datasets generated from two approaches were compared: (1) fully manual abstraction by clinical abstractors, and (2) AI-automated extraction using a large language model (LLM) pipeline followed by human validation through a customized interface. Patient-level variables (e.g., tumor location, cancer stage, morphology, treatment regimens, type and date of surgery) were compared. Discordant cases underwent additional in-depth consensus review by clinical abstractors to adjudicate the results. Results: Reference cohort comprised of predominantly colorectal cancer (72%) with a smaller representation of other cancer types (eg. 6% appendiceal, 4% small intestine, 2% each of esophageal, anal, liver), stage II-III in 62% of cases, 44% female, median age 64.9 years. The fully manually abstracted dataset included 863 events, and the AI-assisted included 883 events. The AI-assisted abstraction demonstrated high concordance with manual abstraction across all selected fields (average 90% before review). Importantly, in many of the discordant cases, the AI-assisted pipeline provided more complete or accurate information than manual abstraction. For example, primary tumor location was captured more accurately with AI in 83% (5/6) of discordant cases, group staging in 75% (3/4) of discordant cases, and MSI status in 63% (5/8). Overall, key data elements showed excellent agreement, with the AI-assisted approach showing similar or superior accuracy for such fields as cancer type (98%), surgery date (94%), relapse date (92%), status of adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapy (96% and 100%). Conclusions: The AI-assisted abstraction platform, leveraging an LLM pipeline to present extractions to a clinical reviewer, demonstrates high concordance with manual curation and offers substantial improvements in abstraction throughput. This synergy of AI-driven extractions and expert oversight presents a highly effective and robust methodology for clinical data abstraction.

Article Details

Volume / Issue Vol. 44, Issue 2_suppl
Published January 10, 2026
Pages 843-843
ISSN 0732-183X
Publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

Journal Info

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

ISSN: 0732-183X Health Sciences

Authors (16)

A

Axel Grothey

W

Wenjun He

Tsinghua Center for Green Chemical Engineering Electrification, Department of Chemical Engineering

Y

Yidan Qin

Natera, Inc., Austin, TX

V

Vasily N. Aushev

H

Harendra Guturu

Natera, Inc., Austin, TX

J

Jacob Hamblin

Natera, Inc., Austin, TX

P

Pamella Tater

Natera, Inc., Austin, TX

R

Raven Brothers

Natera, Inc., Austin, TX

E

Elizabeth Strojny

Natera, Inc., Austin, TX

P

Priyal Patel

mRNA Center of Excellence Sanofi Waltham MA 02451 USA

A

Arianna Brisley

Natera, Inc., Austin, TX

T

Traci Moreland

Natera, Inc., Austin, TX

J

Jenny Park

A

Alyssa Antonopoulos

Natera, Inc., Austin, TX

A

Adham A. Jurdi

Natera, Inc., Austin, TX

S

Solomon Moshkevich

Natera, Inc., Austin, TX