Detection of Patient-Level Immunotherapy-Related Adverse Events (irAEs) from Clinical Narratives of Electronic Health Records: A High-Sensitivity Artificial Intelligence Model.
Md Muntasir Zitu, Margaret E Gatti-Mays, Kai C Johnson, Shijun Zhang, Aditi Shendre, Mohamed I Elsaid, Lang Li
{"title":"Detection of Patient-Level Immunotherapy-Related Adverse Events (irAEs) from Clinical Narratives of Electronic Health Records: A High-Sensitivity Artificial Intelligence Model.","authors":"Md Muntasir Zitu, Margaret E Gatti-Mays, Kai C Johnson, Shijun Zhang, Aditi Shendre, Mohamed I Elsaid, Lang Li","doi":"10.2147/POR.S468253","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We developed an artificial intelligence (AI) model to detect immunotherapy -related adverse events (irAEs) from clinical narratives of electronic health records (EHRs) at the patient level.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>Training data, used for internal validation of the AI model, comprised 1230 clinical notes from 30 patients at The Ohio State University James Cancer Hospital-20 patients who experienced irAEs and ten who did not. 3256 clinical notes of 50 patients were utilized for external validation of the AI model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Use of a leave-one-out cross-validation technique for internal validation among those 30 patients yielded accurate identification of 19 of 20 with irAEs (positive patients; 95% sensitivity) and correct dissociation of eight of ten without (negative patients; 80% specificity). External validation on 3256 clinical notes of 50 patients yielded high sensitivity (95%) but moderate specificity (64%). If we improve the model's specificity to 100%, it could eliminate the need to manually review 2500 of those 3256 clinical notes (77%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Combined use of this AI model with the manual review of clinical notes will improve both sensitivity and specificity in the detection of irAEs, decreasing workload and costs and facilitating the development of improved immunotherapies.</p>","PeriodicalId":20399,"journal":{"name":"Pragmatic and Observational Research","volume":"15 ","pages":"243-252"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11668329/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pragmatic and Observational Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/POR.S468253","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: We developed an artificial intelligence (AI) model to detect immunotherapy -related adverse events (irAEs) from clinical narratives of electronic health records (EHRs) at the patient level.
Patients and methods: Training data, used for internal validation of the AI model, comprised 1230 clinical notes from 30 patients at The Ohio State University James Cancer Hospital-20 patients who experienced irAEs and ten who did not. 3256 clinical notes of 50 patients were utilized for external validation of the AI model.
Results: Use of a leave-one-out cross-validation technique for internal validation among those 30 patients yielded accurate identification of 19 of 20 with irAEs (positive patients; 95% sensitivity) and correct dissociation of eight of ten without (negative patients; 80% specificity). External validation on 3256 clinical notes of 50 patients yielded high sensitivity (95%) but moderate specificity (64%). If we improve the model's specificity to 100%, it could eliminate the need to manually review 2500 of those 3256 clinical notes (77%).
Conclusion: Combined use of this AI model with the manual review of clinical notes will improve both sensitivity and specificity in the detection of irAEs, decreasing workload and costs and facilitating the development of improved immunotherapies.
期刊介绍:
Pragmatic and Observational Research is an international, peer-reviewed, open-access journal that publishes data from studies designed to closely reflect medical interventions in real-world clinical practice, providing insights beyond classical randomized controlled trials (RCTs). While RCTs maximize internal validity for cause-and-effect relationships, they often represent only specific patient groups. This journal aims to complement such studies by providing data that better mirrors real-world patients and the usage of medicines, thus informing guidelines and enhancing the applicability of research findings across diverse patient populations encountered in everyday clinical practice.