A systematic review examined 29 peer-reviewed studies involving AI-enhanced multidisciplinary tumor boards compared to human-only meetings. The research looked at how artificial intelligence, including large language models, affects clinical decisions and team efficiency in oncology settings.
The analysis found that AI systems substantially agreed with human boards on guideline-driven decisions and showed notable strengths in standardizing recommendations and identifying molecular targets. AI tools also reduced the time needed for MDT preparation and helped democratize access to sub-specialty expertise.
However, the review noted limitations when handling complex, individualized cases. AI systems struggled with nuanced clinical judgment and patient-specific factors. While cost-effectiveness was mentioned as an outcome, rigorous evidence on this topic remains limited. The study does not report safety concerns or adverse events.
Readers should understand that this AI represents strategic augmentation rather than a replacement for human judgment. The evidence suggests AI is a helpful tool for preparation and standardization but cannot yet fully replicate the nuanced decisions required in complex cancer care.
