ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2026
An agentic AI system enhances clinical detection of immunotherapy toxicities: a multi-phase validation study.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2026. 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
27 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) affect up to 40% of patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors, yet their identification depends on laborious and inconsistent manual chart review. Here we developed and evaluated an agentic large language model system to extract the presence, temporality, severity grade, attribution, and certainty of six irAE types from clinical notes. Retrospectively (263 notes), the system achieved macro-averaged F1 of 0.92 for detection and 0.66 for multi-class severity grading; self-consistency improved F1 by 0.14. The best-performing configuration cost approximately $0.02 per note. In prospective silent deployment over three months (884 notes), detection F1 was 0.72-0.79. In a randomized crossover study of clinical trial staff (17 participants, 316 observations), agentic assistance reduced annotation time by 40% (P < 0.001), increased complete-match accuracy (OR 1.45; 95% CI 1.01-2.09; P = 0.045), and improved inter-annotator agreement (Krippendorff's α from 0.22-0.51 to 0.82-0.85). These results demonstrate that agentic AI coupled with human verification could enhance efficiency, performance, and consistency for irAE assessment.
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.