Tanios S. Bekaii-Saab

arXiv2026

Digitally enriching a high-risk population for pancreatic cancer using routine blood-based measures and clinical histories

Earlier detection of pancreatic cancer is key to enabling wider access to curative treatment and reducing cancer deaths; however, screening is presently not viable. Latent digital indicators of pathology are evident in an individual's disease and blood test trajectories and may predict the development of pancreatic cancer. Longitudinal sequences of coded diagnoses and blood test values accrued by patients throughout their clinical interactions were used to train a custom Transformer-based neural network with a multi-head attention mechanism to predict risk of pancreatic cancer with a multi-year lead time and risk-stratify populations for targeted screening. Mayo Clinic Platform with trained model from Mayo Clinic Rochester validated at Mayo Clinic Arizona, Mayo Clinic Florida, and Mayo Clinic Health Systems. The cohort comprised 6,017 adults with pancreatic cancer and 177,081 controls (median age 75, 45% female) with median 12 years (interquartile range 6.9-16.2) of medical history prior to pancreatic cancer diagnosis. External validation via leave-one-site-out, out-of-sample testing predicting pancreatic cancer 1-, 2-, and 3-years prior to diagnosis demonstrated mean area under the receiver operating characteristic of 0.837 (95% confidence interval 0.827-0.848), 0.797 (95% confidence interval 0.782-0.813), and 0.760 (95% confidence interval 0.745-0.776), respectively. Estimated pancreatic cancer risks were well-calibrated (calibration plot slope 1.08, intercept of -0.077; Brier score 0.025), and a Bayesian population pancreatic cancer prevalence update allows estimated cancer risk outputs to be transportable across settings. At testing, a screening threshold of >3.3% risk of pancreatic cancer in 1-year offered a diagnostic odds ratio of 18.2. Our work therefore lays the foundation for a digital population-level risk enrichment tool that could widen access to curative-intent management.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2025

Cognitive bias in LLM reasoning compromises interpretation of clinical oncology notes

Despite high performance on clinical benchmarks, large language models may reach correct conclusions through faulty reasoning, a failure mode with safety implications for oncology decision support that is not captured by accuracy-based evaluation. In this two-cohort retrospective study, we developed a hierarchical taxonomy of reasoning errors from GPT-4 chain-of-thought responses to real oncology notes and tested its clinical relevance. Using breast and pancreatic cancer notes from the CORAL dataset, we annotated 600 reasoning traces to define a three-tier taxonomy mapping computational failures to cognitive bias frameworks. We validated the taxonomy on 822 responses from prostate cancer consult notes spanning localized through metastatic disease, simulating extraction, analysis, and clinical recommendation tasks. Reasoning errors occurred in 23 percent of interpretations and dominated overall errors, with confirmation bias and anchoring bias most common. Reasoning failures were associated with guideline-discordant and potentially harmful recommendations, particularly in advanced disease management. Automated evaluators using state-of-the-art language models detected error presence but could not reliably classify subtypes. These findings show that large language models may provide fluent but clinically unsafe recommendations when reasoning is flawed. The taxonomy provides a generalizable framework for evaluating and improving reasoning fidelity before clinical deployment.

cs.CL↗