Abstract
ABSTRACT
Background & Aims
Drug‐induced liver injury (DILI) would progress to chronicity or death. Large language models (LLMs) may enhance clinical decision‐making, yet their utility relative to physicians in DILI remains unclear. Therefore, we evaluated their performance in predicting DILI outcomes.
Methods
We enrolled 943 DILI patients from three centers as internal and external cohorts. Based on 12‐month follow‐up, outcomes were classified as recovery, 6/12‐month chronicity, and death. LLMs (Gemini‐2.5 Pro, GPT‐5.1, DeepSeek‐3.2), hepatologists (Junior, middle, senior), and models (Hy's Law, nHy's Law, MELD Score) estimated probabilities of outcomes. LLM‐Rules (VOTE, OR, AND) were applied to enhance stability. Model performance was assessed.
Results
For 6‐month chronicity, the senior achieved highest AUROC (0.61) with an accuracy of 70%. Gemini‐2.5 Pro and GPT‐5.1 yielded AUROCs of 0.60 and 0.59, respectively, outperforming junior and middle hepatologists. Gemini‐2.5 Pro demonstrated strongest agreement with senior (
κ
= 0.43). LLMs all exhibited lower accuracy and specificity than hepatologists. A similar result was observed in 12‐month chronicity. For overall mortality, the senior achieved highest AUROC (0.87) with an accuracy of 83%. Gemini‐2.5 Pro and GPT‐5.1 achieved AUROCs of 0.86, outperforming junior hepatologist, Hy's Law, and nHy's Law. GPT‐5.1 achieved strongest agreement with senior (
κ
= 0.25). LLM‐Rules demonstrated stability for predicting outcomes across cohorts. OR and AND rules improved sensitivity and specificity, respectively.
Conclusions
GPT‐5.1 and Gemini‐2.5 Pro showed AUROCs approaching senior hepatologists for DILI outcomes with limited accuracy and specificity. LLM‐Rules demonstrated stable performance across cohorts with improved sensitivity or specificity, supporting the potential of multi‐LLM approaches as clinician‐supervised complementary tools.