PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Chao, Chieh-Ju AU - Banerjee, Imon AU - Arsanjani, Reza AU - Ayoub, Chadi AU - Tseng, Andrew AU - Delbrouck, Jean-Benoit AU - Kane, Garvan C. AU - Lopez-Jimenez, Francisco AU - Attia, Zachi AU - Oh, Jae K AU - Fei-Fei, Li AU - Adeli, Ehsan AU - Langlotz, Curtis TI - EchoGPT: A Large Language Model for Echocardiography Report Summarization AID - 10.1101/2024.01.18.24301503 DP - 2024 Jan 01 TA - medRxiv PG - 2024.01.18.24301503 4099 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/04/09/2024.01.18.24301503.short 4100 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/04/09/2024.01.18.24301503.full AB - Background The increasing need for diagnostic echocardiography (echo) tests presents challenges in preserving the quality and promptness of reports. While Large Language Models (LLMs) have proven effective in summarizing clinical texts, their application in echo remains underexplored. To address this, we proposed EchoGPT, a dedicated, domain specific LLM focused on echo report summarization.Methods Adult echo studies conducted at the Mayo Clinic from January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2017, were collected and categorized into two groups: development (all Mayo locations except Arizona) and AZ validation (Mayo Arizona) sets. We adapted open-source LLMs (Llama-2, MedAlpaca, Zephyr, and Flan-T5) using In-Context Learning (ICL) and Quantized Low-Rank Adaptation (QLoRA) fine-tuning for echo report summarization. The models’ performance was assessed both quantitatively with automatic metrics and qualitatively by cardiologists.Results The development dataset included 97,506 reports from 71,717 unique patients, predominantly male (55.4%), with an average age of 64.3±15.8 years. The final split contains 95,506 for training, and 1,000 each for validation and testing. EchoGPT, a QLoRA fine-tuned Llama-2 model, outperformed other LLMs with win rates ranging from 87% to 99% in various automatic metrics (BLEU, METEOR, ROUGE-L, BERT Score, and RadGraph F1 Score), and produced reports comparable to cardiologists in 30 randomly selected cases for qualitative human review (significantly preferred in conciseness (p< 0.001), with no significant preference in completeness, correctness, and clinical utility).Conclusions Capable of generating echocardiography reports on par with cardiologists, EchoGPT could be used to generate draft reports for human review and approval, with significant workflow advantages.Clinical PerspectiveWhat is new? This study is the first attempt to compare multiple open-source LLMs and different model adaptation methods in echocardiography report summarization.The resulting system, EchoGPT, can generate echo reports comparable in quality to cardiologists.Future metrics for echo report quality should emphasize factual correctness, especially on numerical measurements.What are the clinical implications? EchoGPT system demonstrated the potential of introducing LLMs into echocardiography practice, to be used as an AI co-pilot to generate echo reports.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis study did not receive any funding. Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:IRB of the Mayo Clinic gave ethical approval for this work. I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.Yes