Gastric-X: A Multimodal Multi-Phase Benchmark Dataset for Advancing Vision-Language Models in Gastric Cancer Analysis

Vision-language models (VLMs) are prone to hallucination, which remains a major barrier to their safe deployment in clinical practice. To date, most hallucination detection methods have been evaluated on radiology benchmarks such as MIMIC-CXR and VQA-RAD, while gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy remains largely underexplored. In this paper, we benchmark nine hallucination detection methods on the Gut-VLM dataset, a GI diagnostic Visual Question Answering (VQA) dataset with 4,392 test VQA pairs, across five VLMs (MedGemma-4B, MedGemma-27B, LLaVA-Med-7B, LLaVA-v1.6-7B, and Lingshu-32B). The methods span three categories: black-box methods (RadFlag, SelfCheckGPT-NLI), gray-box methods (AvgProb, AvgEnt, MaxProb, MaxEnt, Semantic Entropy, and VASE), and a white-box method (ReXTrust). Our results show that ReXTrust, a white-box method, achieves the highest AUC across all five models, outperforming the strongest alternative method on each VLM by a statistically significant margin (paired permutation test, p < 0.001 in all cases), reaching a peak AUC of 93.0 on MedGemma-4B. White-box hidden-state access provides a consistent advantage of 19.5 AUC points on average (range: 9.5--33.5), with ReXTrust maintaining strong performance even on LLaVA-v1.6-7B (AUC 79.9), where black-box methods and clustering-based gray-box methods collapse to near-chance performance. Among non-white-box methods, token-level gray-box statistics (MaxEnt, MaxProb) are the strongest alternatives, outperforming both clustering-based gray-box methods (Semantic Entropy, VASE) and black-box approaches on average. We further identify confident confabulation, a failure mode in which models hallucinate with high inter-sample consistency or high token-level probability, as a systemic failure for both consistency and uncertainty-based methods.

Vision-language models (VLMs) are increasingly proposed for clinical decision support, yet their reliability in real-world scenarios that require integrating both visual and textual context from medical records remains poorly characterized. This paper identifies three failure modes: (1) modality over-reliance on text over images, (2) spurious reliance on irrelevant clinical history, and (3) prompt sensitivity across semantically equivalent inputs. We evaluate a diverse set of general-domain and medically-tuned open and closed VLMs on chest x-ray tasks using MIMIC-CXR. By systematically manipulating image-text alignment, clinical history, and prompt formulations, we found that VLM decisions are dominated by the text modality, even when visual evidence is available. Moreover, we observed that VLMs are heavily influenced by irrelevant reports, while minor prompt changes can reverse correct image-based predictions. Our findings underscore the need for explicit safeguards and stress-testing before considering the use of these models in clinical practice.

The rapid advancement of vision-language models (VLMs) has accelerated progress in computational pathology; however, whole-slide image (WSI)-based pathology report generation remains limited by the scarcity of large-scale WSI--report datasets and the complexity of mapping spatially distributed visual patterns to structured clinical text. To address this, we introduce a clinically curated Pan-Asia WSI--report dataset of approximately 10,500 pairs from five institutions and establish the REG 2025 benchmark through a MICCAI challenge for systematic evaluation of multimodal models. We analyze submitted methods spanning pretrained VLMs, multiple-instance learning frameworks, hierarchical expert models, retrieval-augmented generation, and cross-modal Transformers. Rather than indicating that VLM use alone was sufficient for superior performance, the results suggest that top-performing methods benefited from structured report representations, hierarchical diagnostic decomposition, and effective multimodal grounding. We identify key limitations, including instability in quantitative attribute estimation (e.g., numeric hallucination) and a tendency toward diagnostic overspecification, with some errors resembling known diagnostic pitfalls in routine pathology. These findings establish REG 2025 as a benchmark for evaluating WSI-based structured report generation and vision-language understanding in computational pathology, providing insights for the design of clinically grounded multimodal pathology models.