{"title":"解毒剂药物-药物相互作用警报的不一致性:电子数据库的比较分析和人工智能工具的解释见解。","authors":"Thitipon Yaowaluk, Supawit Tangpanithandee, Pinnakarn Techapichetvanich, Phisit Khemawoot","doi":"10.2147/DDDT.S543827","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Drug-drug interactions (DDIs) are a critical clinical concern, especially when administering multiple medications, including antidotes. Despite their lifesaving potential, antidotes may interact harmfully with other drugs. However, few studies have specifically investigated DDIs involving antidotes.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study evaluated potential DDIs between commonly prescribed medications and antidotes using two widely used electronic databases, along with artificial intelligence (AI) to assess the concordance between these platforms.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A descriptive analysis was conducted using 50 frequently prescribed medications from the ClinCalc DrugStats Database (2022) and major antidotes as reported by California Poison Control Center. Potential interactions were assessed using Micromedex and WebMD as electronic databases, and ChatGPT and Google Gemini as representative AI. DDI severity levels and documentation quality were recorded, and database/AI agreement was analyzed using the kappa statistic.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, 154 potential DDI pairs were identified by the databases (Micromedex: 100, WebMD: 118). Nineteen DDIs were classified as severe by both databases. The overall agreement between databases was poor (kappa = -0.126, p = 0.008), indicating significant discrepancies in DDI severity classification. The main mechanisms associated with severe DDIs included serotonin syndrome and QT prolongation, with methylene blue and psychiatric medications being major contributors to severe DDIs. When evaluating the 19 severe DDIs from both databases, the AI models generally aligned with the more severe rating in cases of database discordance. The AI models' consensus was often supported by severity-oriented justifications, highlighting this as a conservative approach to resolving discordant DDI information.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Numerous potential DDIs between prescribed drugs and antidotes were identified, with notable inconsistencies between the two databases and AI. This underscores the need to harmonize DDI evaluation criteria across drug information systems and promote clinicians' awareness of inter-database variability. Incorporating comprehensive DDI screening and shared decision-making is essential to ensure safe and effective patient care.</p>","PeriodicalId":11290,"journal":{"name":"Drug Design, Development and Therapy","volume":"19 ","pages":"7427-7443"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12399100/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Discordance in Drug-Drug Interaction Alerts for Antidotes: Comparative Analysis of Electronic Databases and Interpretive Insights from AI Tools.\",\"authors\":\"Thitipon Yaowaluk, Supawit Tangpanithandee, Pinnakarn Techapichetvanich, Phisit Khemawoot\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/DDDT.S543827\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Drug-drug interactions (DDIs) are a critical clinical concern, especially when administering multiple medications, including antidotes. Despite their lifesaving potential, antidotes may interact harmfully with other drugs. However, few studies have specifically investigated DDIs involving antidotes.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study evaluated potential DDIs between commonly prescribed medications and antidotes using two widely used electronic databases, along with artificial intelligence (AI) to assess the concordance between these platforms.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A descriptive analysis was conducted using 50 frequently prescribed medications from the ClinCalc DrugStats Database (2022) and major antidotes as reported by California Poison Control Center. Potential interactions were assessed using Micromedex and WebMD as electronic databases, and ChatGPT and Google Gemini as representative AI. DDI severity levels and documentation quality were recorded, and database/AI agreement was analyzed using the kappa statistic.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, 154 potential DDI pairs were identified by the databases (Micromedex: 100, WebMD: 118). Nineteen DDIs were classified as severe by both databases. The overall agreement between databases was poor (kappa = -0.126, p = 0.008), indicating significant discrepancies in DDI severity classification. The main mechanisms associated with severe DDIs included serotonin syndrome and QT prolongation, with methylene blue and psychiatric medications being major contributors to severe DDIs. When evaluating the 19 severe DDIs from both databases, the AI models generally aligned with the more severe rating in cases of database discordance. The AI models' consensus was often supported by severity-oriented justifications, highlighting this as a conservative approach to resolving discordant DDI information.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Numerous potential DDIs between prescribed drugs and antidotes were identified, with notable inconsistencies between the two databases and AI. This underscores the need to harmonize DDI evaluation criteria across drug information systems and promote clinicians' awareness of inter-database variability. Incorporating comprehensive DDI screening and shared decision-making is essential to ensure safe and effective patient care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11290,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Drug Design, Development and Therapy\",\"volume\":\"19 \",\"pages\":\"7427-7443\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12399100/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Drug Design, Development and Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/DDDT.S543827\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, MEDICINAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Drug Design, Development and Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/DDDT.S543827","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MEDICINAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:药物-药物相互作用(ddi)是一个重要的临床问题,特别是当使用多种药物时,包括解毒剂。尽管解毒剂具有挽救生命的潜力,但它可能与其他药物相互作用。然而,很少有研究专门调查涉及解毒剂的ddi。目的:本研究使用两个广泛使用的电子数据库评估常用处方药和解毒剂之间的潜在ddi,并使用人工智能(AI)评估这些平台之间的一致性。材料和方法:对ClinCalc DrugStats数据库(2022)中的50种常用处方药和加州毒物控制中心报告的主要解毒剂进行描述性分析。使用Micromedex和WebMD作为电子数据库,ChatGPT和谷歌Gemini作为代表性人工智能,评估潜在的相互作用。记录DDI严重程度和文档质量,并使用kappa统计分析数据库/AI一致性。结果:共鉴定出154对潜在的DDI对(Micromedex: 100, WebMD: 118)。两个数据库均将19例ddi分类为严重。数据库之间的总体一致性较差(kappa = -0.126, p = 0.008),表明DDI严重程度分类存在显著差异。与严重ddi相关的主要机制包括血清素综合征和QT间期延长,亚甲基蓝和精神药物是严重ddi的主要诱因。在评估来自两个数据库的19个严重ddi时,在数据库不一致的情况下,AI模型通常与更严重的评级保持一致。人工智能模型的共识通常得到以严重性为导向的理由的支持,强调这是解决不一致的DDI信息的保守方法。结论:在处方药物和解毒剂之间发现了许多潜在的ddi,两个数据库与AI之间存在明显的不一致性。这强调需要协调跨药物信息系统的DDI评估标准,并促进临床医生对数据库间可变性的认识。综合DDI筛查和共同决策对于确保安全和有效的患者护理至关重要。
Discordance in Drug-Drug Interaction Alerts for Antidotes: Comparative Analysis of Electronic Databases and Interpretive Insights from AI Tools.
Background: Drug-drug interactions (DDIs) are a critical clinical concern, especially when administering multiple medications, including antidotes. Despite their lifesaving potential, antidotes may interact harmfully with other drugs. However, few studies have specifically investigated DDIs involving antidotes.
Purpose: This study evaluated potential DDIs between commonly prescribed medications and antidotes using two widely used electronic databases, along with artificial intelligence (AI) to assess the concordance between these platforms.
Materials and methods: A descriptive analysis was conducted using 50 frequently prescribed medications from the ClinCalc DrugStats Database (2022) and major antidotes as reported by California Poison Control Center. Potential interactions were assessed using Micromedex and WebMD as electronic databases, and ChatGPT and Google Gemini as representative AI. DDI severity levels and documentation quality were recorded, and database/AI agreement was analyzed using the kappa statistic.
Results: Overall, 154 potential DDI pairs were identified by the databases (Micromedex: 100, WebMD: 118). Nineteen DDIs were classified as severe by both databases. The overall agreement between databases was poor (kappa = -0.126, p = 0.008), indicating significant discrepancies in DDI severity classification. The main mechanisms associated with severe DDIs included serotonin syndrome and QT prolongation, with methylene blue and psychiatric medications being major contributors to severe DDIs. When evaluating the 19 severe DDIs from both databases, the AI models generally aligned with the more severe rating in cases of database discordance. The AI models' consensus was often supported by severity-oriented justifications, highlighting this as a conservative approach to resolving discordant DDI information.
Conclusion: Numerous potential DDIs between prescribed drugs and antidotes were identified, with notable inconsistencies between the two databases and AI. This underscores the need to harmonize DDI evaluation criteria across drug information systems and promote clinicians' awareness of inter-database variability. Incorporating comprehensive DDI screening and shared decision-making is essential to ensure safe and effective patient care.
期刊介绍:
Drug Design, Development and Therapy is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal that spans the spectrum of drug design, discovery and development through to clinical applications.
The journal is characterized by the rapid reporting of high-quality original research, reviews, expert opinions, commentary and clinical studies in all therapeutic areas.
Specific topics covered by the journal include:
Drug target identification and validation
Phenotypic screening and target deconvolution
Biochemical analyses of drug targets and their pathways
New methods or relevant applications in molecular/drug design and computer-aided drug discovery*
Design, synthesis, and biological evaluation of novel biologically active compounds (including diagnostics or chemical probes)
Structural or molecular biological studies elucidating molecular recognition processes
Fragment-based drug discovery
Pharmaceutical/red biotechnology
Isolation, structural characterization, (bio)synthesis, bioengineering and pharmacological evaluation of natural products**
Distribution, pharmacokinetics and metabolic transformations of drugs or biologically active compounds in drug development
Drug delivery and formulation (design and characterization of dosage forms, release mechanisms and in vivo testing)
Preclinical development studies
Translational animal models
Mechanisms of action and signalling pathways
Toxicology
Gene therapy, cell therapy and immunotherapy
Personalized medicine and pharmacogenomics
Clinical drug evaluation
Patient safety and sustained use of medicines.