ArticleDrug design, development and therapy2025
Discordance in Drug-Drug Interaction Alerts for Antidotes: Comparative Analysis of Electronic Databases and Interpretive Insights from AI Tools.
Article in Drug design, development and therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
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.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.