Finding H. pylori in the Fine Print: Evidence-Linked Multi-Agent Case Finding from Gastric Biopsy Reports

Gastric cancer remains a major cause of cancer mortality, yet its histological and molecular heterogeneity complicates diagnosis and risk stratification. General-purpose pathology foundation models (PFMs) often plateau on fine-grained endpoints central to gastric cancer care, and few have undergone rigorous prospective validation or clinical reader studies. We present GRACE, a Gastric-specific foundation model for Real-world Assessment and Clinical dEcision support. GRACE was developed from multicenter gastric pathology datasets totaling 48,364 primarily HE-stained whole-slide images from 37,493 patients. When evaluated on 28 clinically relevant tasks, GRACE consistently outperformed representative pancancer PFMs, achieving a macro-AUC of 0.9188, with strong performance for precancerous lesion diagnosis (macro-AUC 0.9322), tumor histopathological assessment (macro-AUC 0.9119), molecular profiling (macro-AUC 0.8682), and prognostic prediction. Beyond benchmarking, GRACE's translational value was substantiated through a rigorous evidence chain. Under safety-gated criteria requiring 100% NPV for rule-out and 100% PPV for rule-in, GRACE streamlined review for up to 69.6% of malignancy-diagnosis cases and triaged 46.8% of MMR-IHC follow-up requests. This translational feasibility was further strengthened by a randomized crossover reader study of pathologist-AI collaboration. With GRACE assistance, diagnostic accuracy improved from 82.0% to 89.9%, yielding nearly twofold higher adjusted odds of a correct diagnosis (OR 1.987) alongside concurrent gains in sensitivity and specificity. AI assistance also reduced diagnostic time by 14.9%, elevated diagnostic confidence by 9.0%, and markedly improved inter-rater agreement. When calibrated to maintain non-inferior performance to senior pathologists, the AI-assisted workflow could triage 60.7% of atrophy and 82.7% of intestinal metaplasia cases.

Gastric intestinal metaplasia (GIM) is a precursor lesion to gastric dysplasia and adenocarcinoma whose early detection is crucial for intervening in the carcinogenesis cascade. Artificial intelligence (AI) holds considerable promise for real-time endoscopic detection and characterization of GIM. However, development of reliable AI models has been constrained by the absence of publicly available, histopathologically validated datasets that combine detailed endoscopic annotations, histological subtype (complete and incomplete), standardized grading systems, and normal mucosal patterns. GIM-ENDO was designed to fill this gap. The dataset comprises demographic data, endoscopic findings, histopathological results, and H. pylori status acquired using the Olympus EVIS X1 system with white-light endoscopy (WLE) and image-enhanced endoscopy (IEE), including narrow-band imaging (NBI) and magnifying NBI (M-NBI), along with images and video clips from 24 patients (22 GIM-positive, 2 normal controls). Annotations cover six primary IEE endoscopic signs -- light blue crest (LBC), marginal turbid band (MTB), white opaque substance (WOS), TV pattern (Fusion), atrophy, and map-like erythema (MLE) -- plus two additional endoscopic findings (AHP and GA) recorded where present. GIM subtypes (complete and incomplete) are annotated for all GIM-positive cases; OLGA and OLGIM staging are provided where complete histological sampling was available. The dataset is publicly accessible at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20707267. For the latest updates and further information regarding this dataset, readers are referred to the DataBioX website: https://databiox.com A short version of this work has been submitted to MICCAI 2026 Open Data Track.

Confirmed oncogenic microbes contribute significantly to cancer burden. Identifying novel microbial oncogenicity could yield strategies that will reduce disease burdens. However, relevant evidence is dispersed and infeasible for humans to comprehensively synthesize. LLMs may enable scalable, expert-level systematic evidence synthesis to identify microbe-cancer pairs; however, such capabilities have not yet been demonstrated. Domain experts were recruited to create a dataset to benchmark LLM performance (Gemini 2.5 Pro, Gemini 2.5 Flash, GPT-5, GPT-5 Nano) on 24 research papers using MMTV-LV and breast cancer as a case study. We devised a structured template for evidence extraction and appraisal, consisting of MCQ, Likert-scale, multi-select, and free-text question types (77 items across 24 papers). Agreement between (1) experts and (2) experts and each LLM was determined per question instance using novel metrics. LLMs were assessed by comparing inter-expert and expert-LLM agreement distributions to determine whether LLMs behaved as additional experts by increasing or maintaining inter-expert agreement. Free-text responses were further evaluated qualitatively. Across all question types, LLM responses aligned closely with experts, with GPT-5 and GPT-5 Nano achieving score distributions indistinguishable from experts. Gemini models behaved similarly but were significantly more lenient in applying microbial oncogenesis criteria. Hallucinations were rare. Methodological appraisal and identification of contradictions within full-texts were the most persistent LLM vulnerabilities. GPT-5 and GPT-5 Nano were indistinguishable from experts on structured domain research paper evaluation tasks. This supports use of LLMs for automated systematic evidence synthesis. However, methodological appraisal tasks and contradiction identification in full-texts remain weaknesses requiring strengthening.