MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4295969902 · doi:10.2196/39229

Photosensitivity From Avapritinib: Pharamacovigilance Analysis

2022· article· en· W4295969902 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ajit Venkatakrishnan, Brandon Chu, Pushkar Aggarwal

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Dermatology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotosensitivityMedicineOdds ratioAdverse effectAdverse Event Reporting SystemPopulationConfidence intervalFood and drug administrationMeta-analysisInternal medicinePharmacologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Certain protein kinase inhibitors have been reported to cause photosensitivity. Avapritinib is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor that was approved in January 2020. The aim of this analysis was to determine if a statistically significant signal exists between Avapritinib and photosensitivity in the real-world population. A disproportionality analysis was conducted using the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) from January 1, 2020, to December 31, 2021. A literature review was also performed to identify case reports of Avapritinib-induced photosensitivity. A total of 13 adverse event reports with Avapritinib as the drug and photosensitivity as the reaction were identified in FAERS. Avapritinib was the suspect drug in all 13 reports, and in 12 of the 13 reports, Avapritinib was the only drug listed. Disproportionality analysis found a proportional reporting ratio of 11.0, χ21=107, reporting odds ratio of 11.0, and a lower limit of the 95% CI of the information component of 2.1. The literature review found 1 case report of Avapritinib-induced photosensitivity in a patient who had been taking Avapritinib 300 mg daily for 5 months. A statistically significant signal was found between Avapritinib use and photosensitivity. Clinicians should continue to balance the benefits and risks when prescribing Avapritinib to patients.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.410
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.306 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR DermatologySame topicChronic Lymphocytic Leukemia ResearchFrench-language works237,207