ChatGPT, alleato del farmacista clinico nella verifica delle herbal-drug interactions: potenzialità e limiti.

Q3 Medicine
Marisa Fiordelisi, Simona Masucci, Alessandra Bianco, Marco Bellero, Diana Toma, Nicoletta Campo, Clizia Zichi, Donatella Marino, Elisa Sperti, Giorgio Valabrega, Clara Cena, Giovanna Fazzina, Annalisa Gasco
{"title":"ChatGPT, alleato del farmacista clinico nella verifica delle herbal-drug interactions: potenzialità e limiti.","authors":"Marisa Fiordelisi, Simona Masucci, Alessandra Bianco, Marco Bellero, Diana Toma, Nicoletta Campo, Clizia Zichi, Donatella Marino, Elisa Sperti, Giorgio Valabrega, Clara Cena, Giovanna Fazzina, Annalisa Gasco","doi":"10.1701/4365.43601","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study explores the potential use of ChatGPT, an AI-based language model, in assessing herbal-drug interactions (HDi) to enhance clinical decision-making. HDi can pose significant health risks by reducing drug efficacy or causing unwanted side effects. Clinical pharmacists play a key role in identifying these HDIs, and currently, there are limited tools available for checking drug interactions. The research focuses on a case study of a rectal adenocarcinoma patient treated with capecitabine and 26 supplements, which contain a total of 80 herbal substances. ChatGPT 3.5 was asked three questions regarding potential HDIs: \"Are there possible HDIs?\", \"What is the pharmacokinetic mechanism?\", and \"What is the bibliographic source of the interaction?\". The results were reviewed by an oncology clinical pharmacist and compared to existing databases and independent bibliographic research. The findings highlight ChatGPT's advantage in processing large amounts of data quickly, with 16% of interactions classified as \"unlikely\", confirmed by the pharmacist. However, 73% of the suggested mechanisms were false positives, and 4% were categorized as \"hallucinations\". Additionally, most of the bibliographic sources provided by ChatGPT were outdated or unavailable. While ChatGPT proves useful for initial HDI screening, its limitations include outdated data (last updated in January 2022), lack of access to private databases, and occasional inaccuracies. Further applications of AI in this area are recommended, though expert validation remains essential in the clinical decision-making process.</p>","PeriodicalId":20887,"journal":{"name":"Recenti progressi in medicina","volume":"115 11","pages":"558-559"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Recenti progressi in medicina","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1701/4365.43601","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study explores the potential use of ChatGPT, an AI-based language model, in assessing herbal-drug interactions (HDi) to enhance clinical decision-making. HDi can pose significant health risks by reducing drug efficacy or causing unwanted side effects. Clinical pharmacists play a key role in identifying these HDIs, and currently, there are limited tools available for checking drug interactions. The research focuses on a case study of a rectal adenocarcinoma patient treated with capecitabine and 26 supplements, which contain a total of 80 herbal substances. ChatGPT 3.5 was asked three questions regarding potential HDIs: "Are there possible HDIs?", "What is the pharmacokinetic mechanism?", and "What is the bibliographic source of the interaction?". The results were reviewed by an oncology clinical pharmacist and compared to existing databases and independent bibliographic research. The findings highlight ChatGPT's advantage in processing large amounts of data quickly, with 16% of interactions classified as "unlikely", confirmed by the pharmacist. However, 73% of the suggested mechanisms were false positives, and 4% were categorized as "hallucinations". Additionally, most of the bibliographic sources provided by ChatGPT were outdated or unavailable. While ChatGPT proves useful for initial HDI screening, its limitations include outdated data (last updated in January 2022), lack of access to private databases, and occasional inaccuracies. Further applications of AI in this area are recommended, though expert validation remains essential in the clinical decision-making process.

ChatGPT 是临床药剂师在验证草药与药物相互作用时的盟友:潜力与局限性。
本研究探讨了基于人工智能的语言模型 ChatGPT 在评估草药与药物相互作用(HDi)方面的潜在用途,以加强临床决策。HDi 可降低药物疗效或导致不必要的副作用,从而对健康构成重大风险。临床药剂师在识别这些 HDI 方面发挥着关键作用,而目前用于检查药物相互作用的工具非常有限。这项研究的重点是对一名直肠腺癌患者使用卡培他滨和 26 种保健品进行治疗的案例研究,这些保健品共含有 80 种草药物质。研究人员向 ChatGPT 3.5 提出了三个有关潜在 HDI 的问题:"是否存在可能的 HDIs?"、"药代动力学机制是什么?"和 "相互作用的文献来源是什么?"。肿瘤临床药剂师对结果进行了审查,并与现有数据库和独立文献研究进行了比较。结果凸显了 ChatGPT 在快速处理大量数据方面的优势,16% 的相互作用被归类为 "不太可能",并得到了药剂师的确认。不过,73% 的建议机制是假阳性,4% 被归类为 "幻觉"。此外,ChatGPT 提供的大部分文献来源都已过时或不可用。虽然 ChatGPT 对人类发展指数的初步筛选很有用,但其局限性包括数据过时(最近一次更新是在 2022 年 1 月)、无法访问私人数据库以及偶尔的不准确性。建议在这一领域进一步应用人工智能,尽管专家验证在临床决策过程中仍然至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Recenti progressi in medicina
Recenti progressi in medicina Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
143
期刊介绍: Giunta ormai al sessantesimo anno, Recenti Progressi in Medicina continua a costituire un sicuro punto di riferimento ed uno strumento di lavoro fondamentale per l"ampliamento dell"orizzonte culturale del medico italiano. Recenti Progressi in Medicina è una rivista di medicina interna. Ciò significa il recupero di un"ottica globale e integrata, idonea ad evitare sia i particolarismi della informazione specialistica sia la frammentazione di quella generalista.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信