Comparison of techniques for fine-tuning open-weight models for entity extraction from radiology reports

Objectives: Automatic data extraction from free-text radiology reports enables large-scale research, but few studies assessed the performance of large language models (LLMs) on Dutch neuroradiology reports. Methods: We analyzed 947 brain MRI reports from a tertiary memory clinic (2016-2021), authored by consultant neuroradiologists. Trained medical students annotated thirty variables; 100 reports were double-annotated to assess inter-rater reliability. We evaluated the performance of the open-weight LLM LLaMA 3.1 using different languages (Dutch vs. English translation) and few-shot prompting with different example selection strategies. Performance was evaluated using balanced accuracy for categorical variables, accuracy and mean absolute error for counts, and text similarity for free-text. Metrics were computed across 10 random splits of the 947 reports. Results: LLaMA 3.1 demonstrated high zero-shot performance for visual rating scores (mean [95%-CI]): Medial Temporal Atrophy: 90% [77-100%] on the left and 96% [94-99%] on the right, Global Cortical Atrophy: 87% [83-91%], and Fazekas: 94% [93-96%]. Microbleed mentions were detected with 93% accuracy [92-95%] and infarct mentions with 82% [80-84%]. Text similarity for lesion location reached 0.95 [0.95-0.96]. Performance was lower for numerical variables: 80% [78-82%] for the number of microbleeds and 66% [63-68%] for infarcts. English translation yielded comparable results. Few-shot prompting improved performance for numerical variables, achieving 92% [90-93%] for microbleeds and 81% [77-85%] for infarcts using structural similarity-based selection. Conclusion: LLaMA 3.1 shows strong potential for extracting data from Dutch neuroradiology reports. Few-shot prompting enhances performance for numerical variables, whereas challenges remain for location-specific variables.

Automatic report labeling facilitates the identification of clinical findings from unstructured text and enables large-scale annotation for medical imaging research. Existing rule-based labelers struggle with the diverse descriptions in clinical reports, while fine-tuning pre-trained language models (PLMs) requires large amounts of labeled data that are often unavailable in clinical settings. In this paper, we propose PromptRad, a knowledge-enhanced multi-label \textbf{prompt}-tuning approach for \textbf{rad}iology report labeling under low-resource settings. PromptRad reformulates multi-label classification as masked language modeling and incorporates synonyms from the UMLS Metathesaurus into a multi-word verbalizer to enrich category representations. By fine-tuning the PLM without additional classification layers, PromptRad requires substantially less labeled data than conventional fine-tuning. Experiments on liver CT (computed tomography) reports show that PromptRad outperforms dictionary-based and fine-tuning baselines with only 32 labeled training examples, and achieves competitive performance with GPT-4 despite using a much smaller model. Further analysis demonstrates that PromptRad captures complex negation patterns more effectively than existing methods, making it a promising solution for report labeling in data-scarce clinical scenarios. Our code is available at https://github.com/ila-lab/PromptRad.

Diffusion language models, which generate text by denoising a token canvas bidirectionally instead of emitting tokens left to right, have become competitive with autoregressive (AR) generation. Medical foundation models, however, remain almost entirely autoregressive. We adapt a mixture-of-experts diffusion language model, DiffusionGemma-26B, and benchmark it against its same-size AR sibling Gemma-4-26B under an identical LoRA recipe on medical visual question answering datasets, scored by a verbosity-robust LLM judge. Diffusion matches or exceeds AR on all of them, and the finetuned model (3.8B active) is competitive with frontier vision-language models; its decoding is also 3.5-4.4x faster. Beyond this parity, the diffusion model offers a drafting capability AR lacks: any-order infill. Because the canvas is denoised bidirectionally, a radiologist can fix report fragments and have the model fill the text between them, an operation inherent to diffusion but not to autoregression, which is subpar at it. This suits real reports, which are often terse or inconsistent across clinicians and institutions.