Can large language models detect drug–drug interactions leading to adverse drug reactions?

Résumé fourni par la source

Background: Drug–drug interactions (DDI) are an important cause of adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Could large language models (LLMs) serve as valuable tools for pharmacovigilance specialists in detecting DDIs that lead to ADR notifications? Objective: To compare the performance of three LLMs (ChatGPT, Gemini, and Claude) in detecting and explaining clinically significant DDIs that have led to an ADR. Design: Observational cross-sectional study. Methods: We used the French National Pharmacovigilance Database to randomly extract Individual Case Safety Reports (ICSRs) of ADRs with DDI (positive controls) and ICSRs of ADRs without DDI (negative controls) registered in 2022. Interaction cases were classified by difficulty level (level-1 DDI being the easiest and level-2 DDI being the most difficult). We give each LLM (ChatGPT, Gemini, and Claude) the same prompt and case summary. Sensitivity, specificity, and F -measure were calculated for each LLM in detecting DDIs in the case summaries. Results: We assessed 82 ICSRs with DDIs and 22 ICSRs without DDIs. Among ICSRs with DDIs, 37 involved level-1 DDIs, and 45 involved level-2 DDIs. Correct responses were more frequent for level-1 DDIs than for level-2 DDIs. Regardless of difficulty level, ChatGPT detected 99% of DDI cases, and Claude and Gemini detected 95%. The percentage of correct answers to all DDI-related questions was 66% for ChatGPT, 68% for Claude, and 33% for Gemini. ChatGPT and Claude produced comparable results and outperformed Gemini ( F -measure between 0.83 and 0.85 for ChatGPT and Claude and 0.63–0.68 for Gemini) to detect drugs involved in DDI. All exhibited low specificity (ChatGPT 0.68, Claude 0.64, and Gemini 0.36) and reported nonexistent DDIs for negative controls. Conclusion: LLMs can detect DDIs leading to pharmacovigilance cases, but cannot reliably exclude DDIs in cases without interactions. Pharmacologists are crucial for assessing whether a DDI is implicated in an ADR.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.