← All updates
Observational study

Oncology · 2 h ago

Agentic AI improves chart review for immune-related adverse events

A multi-phase validation study assessed an agentic large language model for extracting immune-related adverse events (irAEs) from clinical notes. Retrospective testing, three months of silent prospective deployment, and a randomized crossover study found improved detection and human annotation efficiency, although performance varied by task.

Researchers developed an agentic language-model system to identify six immune-related adverse events associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors—myocarditis, dermatitis, thyroiditis, hepatitis, colitis and pneumonitis—and extract event timing, severity, treatment attribution and attribution certainty. Retrospective validation used 289 expert-annotated notes, with 263 in the held-out test set. The study also included prospective silent deployment across 884 notes and a randomized crossover evaluation involving 17 clinical trial staff and 20 notes.

On retrospective testing, macro-averaged F1 was 0.92 for current-event detection and 0.66 for multi-class severity grading; attribution detection scored 0.94 when timing was not considered. During silent deployment, binary F1 ranged from 0.72 to 0.79. With AI assistance, annotation took 2.71 minutes less, complete-match accuracy increased (odds ratio 1.45, 95% CI 1.01–2.08), and interannotator agreement rose from 0.22–0.51 to 0.82–0.85. The best-performing configuration cost approximately US$0.02 per note.

The findings suggest potential to support adverse-event curation for research and pharmacovigilance, but do not establish improved patient outcomes or validate use as a clinical decision tool. Prospective testing was silent, and severity grading was less accurate than event detection; the results support further evaluation rather than a change in clinical practice.

In practice

For teams curating immune-related adverse events from oncology notes, agentic AI with human verification may reduce annotation time and improve agreement. The evidence comes from retrospective validation, silent prospective deployment and a small crossover study of 17 clinical trial staff; prospective detection performance was lower than retrospective performance, and severity grading was only moderately accurate. The system was not tested as a live clinical decision tool, and the study does not show improved patient outcomes, so it does not support changing treatment or monitoring practice.

AI-generated clinical interpretation · Not editor-reviewed

AI summary · Not yet editor-reviewed

Is this summary clinically accurate?

Help fellow clinicians: your rating sends inaccurate summaries straight to our editors.

Sign in to rate this summary →

Source

Nature Cancer: An agentic AI system enhances clinical detection of immune-related adverse events in a multi-phase validation study ↗

This is an automated AI-condensed summary that has not yet been reviewed by an editor. Always consult the full item at the original source.