Drug information centre queries and responses about drug interactions over 10 years-A descriptive analysis

Molecular mechanisms underlying methotrexate-induced intestinal injury and protective strategies

Methotrexate (MTX) is a folic acid reductase inhibitor that manages various malignancies as well as immune-mediated inflammatory chronic diseases. Despite being frequently prescribed, MTX's severe multiple toxicities can occasionally limit its therapeutic potential. Intestinal toxicity is a severe adverse effect associated with the administration of MTX, and patients are significantly burdened by MTX-provoked intestinal mucositis. However, the mechanism of such intestinal toxicity is not entirely understood, mechanistic studies demonstrated oxidative stress and inflammatory reactions as key factors that lead to the development of MTX-induced intestinal injury. Besides, MTX causes intestinal cells to express pro-inflammatory cytokines like interleukin-6 (IL-6) and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α), which activate nuclear factor-kappa B (NF-κB). This is followed by the activation of the Janus kinase/signal transducer and activator of the transcription3 (JAK/STAT3) signaling pathway. Moreover, because of its dual anti-inflammatory and antioxidative properties, nuclear factor erythroid-2-related factor 2/heme oxygenase-1 (Nrf2/HO-1) has been considered a critical signaling pathway that counteracts oxidative stress in MTX-induced intestinal injury. Several agents have potential protective effects in counteracting MTX-provoked intestinal injury such as omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids, taurine, umbelliferone, vinpocetine, perindopril, rutin, hesperidin, lycopene, quercetin, apocynin, lactobacillus, berberine, zinc, and nifuroxazide. This review aims to summarize the potential redox molecular mechanisms of MTX-induced intestinal injury and how they can be alleviated. In conclusion, studying these molecular pathways might open the way for early alleviation of the intestinal damage and the development of various agent plans to attenuate MTX-mediated intestinal injury.

Safety and quality of AI chatbots for drug-related inquiries: A real-world comparison with licensed pharmacists

Introduction

Pharmacists play a pivotal role in ensuring patients are administered safe and effective medications; however, they encounter obstacles such as elevated workloads and a scarcity of qualified professionals. Despite the prospective utility of large language models (LLMs), such as Generative Pre-trained Transformers (GPTs), in addressing pharmaceutical inquiries, their applicability in real-world cases remains unexplored.

Objective

To evaluate GPT-based chatbots' accuracy in real-world drug-related inquiries, comparing their performance to licensed pharmacists.

Methods

In this cross-sectional study, authors analyzed real-world drug inquiries from a Drug Information Inquiry Database. Two independent pharmacists evaluated the performance of GPT-based chatbots (GPT-3, GPT-3.5, GPT-4) against human pharmacists using accuracy, detail, and risk of harm criteria. Descriptive statistics described inquiry characteristics. Absolute proportion comparative analyses assessed accuracy, detail, and risk of harm. Stratified analyses were performed for different inquiry types.

Results

Seventy inquiries were included. Most inquiries were received from physicians (41%) and pharmacists (44%). Inquiries type included dosage/administration (34.2%), drug interaction (12.8%) and pregnancy/lactation (15.7%). Majority of inquires included adults (83%) and female patients (54.3%). GPT-4 had 64.3% completely accurate responses, comparable to human pharmacists. GPT-4 and human pharmacists provided sufficiently detailed responses, with GPT-4 offering additional relevant details. Both GPT-4 and human pharmacists delivered 95% safe responses; however, GPT-4 provided proactive risk mitigation information in 70% of the instances, whereas similar information was included in 25.7% of human pharmacists' responses.

Conclusion

Our study showcased GPT-4's potential in addressing drug-related inquiries accurately and safely, comparable to human pharmacists. Current GPT-4-based chatbots could support healthcare professionals and foster global health improvements.

Clinical-pharmacological drug information center of Hannover Medical School: experiences and analysis from a tertiary care university hospital

Drug information centers (DICs) are institutions dedicated to provide objective, independent, and up-to-date information on drugs and their rational use. To overcome the lack of recent DIC reports from central Europe, we analyzed all queries (n = 594) submitted to the DIC run by the Institute for Clinical Pharmacology of Hannover Medical School between October 2018 and April 2022. Approximately one in three queries (31.1%; 185/594) was submitted by internists. 82.8% (492/594) of the queries were patient-specific, while the remaining 17.2% (102/594) were general queries. Adverse drug reactions (ADRs), indications/contraindications, and pharmacodynamic interactions (PDIs) represented the three most frequently addressed query categories, being involved in 44.8% (266/594), 43.3% (257/594), and 34.3% (204/594) of all queries, respectively (assignment of more than one category per query was possible). As compared to general queries, patient-specific queries were statistically significantly more often related to ADRs, PDIs, and pharmacokinetic interactions (PKIs) (ADRs: 35.3% vs. 46.7%, P = 0.034; PDIs: 14.7% vs. 38.4%, P < 0.001; PKIs: 20.6% vs. 31.5%, P = 0.028). To demonstrate the complexity of queries submitted to the clinical-pharmacological DIC, we present and comment on an illustrative selection of queries.

Drug interaction alerts in older primary care patients, and related medically justified actions

PURPOSE

To describe presented interaction alerts in older patients, and the extent to which these require further medical action for the specific patient or are already being addressed.

METHODS

Interaction alerts presented at a physician consultation, for 274 consecutive primary care patients treated with two or more drugs (median age: 75 years; 59% female), were extracted. These alerts are based on Janusmed, a decision support integrated in the medical records that provides recommendations for managing the interactions. One general practitioner (GP) and one GP/clinical pharmacologist determined in retrospect, first independently and then in consensus, whether the alerts justified further medical action, considering each patient's health condition.

RESULTS

In all, 405 drug interaction alerts in 151 (55%) patients were triggered. Medical action in response was deemed medically justified for 35 (9%) alerts in 26 (17%) patients. These actions most often involved a switch to a less interacting drug from the same drug class (n = 10), a separate intake (n = 9), or the ordering of a laboratory test (n = 8). Out of 531 actions suggested by the alert system, only 38 (7%) were applicable to the specific patient, as, for instance, laboratory parameters were already being satisfactorily monitored or a separate intake implemented.

CONCLUSIONS

More than every other older patient receives drug treatment that triggers drug interaction alerts. Nine in ten alerts were already being addressed or were not relevant in the clinical setting, whereas, for the remaining tenth, some medical action, that for unknown reasons had not been taken, was reasonable. These findings show that interaction alerts are questionable as indicators of problematic prescribing.

Drug information centre queries and responses about drug interactions over 10 years-A descriptive analysis

Many people are treated with ≥1 drug, implying that risks of drug interactions need to be considered. The aim of this study was to describe drug interaction queries from healthcare professionals to a drug information centre in Sweden over 10 years focusing on drugs frequently asked about and the advice provided. Advice was recorded in mutually exclusive groups: Avoid, Adjust dose, Separate intake, Vigilance or No problem. For queries with Avoid, Adjust dose or Separate intake advice, alerts were extracted from an interaction database (Janusmed). Of 4335 queries to the centre in 2008-2017, 589 (14%) concerned interactions. Most were posed by physicians (91%) and concerned a specific patient (83%) before treatment initiation (76%). Sertraline, warfarin and methotrexate were the most frequently asked about, whereas queries about cyclophosphamide and rifampicine occurred most often in relation to the number of exposed patients. Advice provided in 557 (95%) replies comprised Avoid: n = 85 (15%), Adjust dose: n = 57 (10%), Separate intake: n = 17 (3%), Vigilance: n = 235 (42%) or No problem: n = 163 (29%). In all, 113 (71%) of 159 queries with Avoid/Adjust dose/Separate intake advice elicited an action alert on Janusmed, whereas 31 (20%) did not result in any alert at all. Summarized, seven in ten replies from the drug information centre recommended an explicit drug treatment action, regarding either specific prescribing aspects, for instance dose adjustments, or active follow-up including monitoring potential adverse reactions and/or laboratory results. Readily accessible decision support regarding drug interactions often provides relevant action alerts, but cannot be solely relied on.