Big data- and machine learning-based analysis of a global pharmacovigilance database enables the discovery of sex-specific differences in the safety profile of dual IL4/IL13 blockade
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Due to its apparent efficacy and safety, dupilumab, a monoclonal antibody that blocks Interleukin 4 (IL-4) and Interleukin 13 (IL-13), has been approved for treating T-helper 2 (Th2) disorders. However, adverse effects like local injection site reactions, conjunctivitis, headaches, and nasopharyngitis have been reported. Sex differences are known to influence both adaptive and innate immune responses and, thus, may have a bearing on the occurrence of these adverse effects. Nevertheless, the literature lacks a comprehensive exploration of this influence, a gap this study aims to bridge. Materials and Methods: A comprehensive data mining of VigiBase, the World Health Organization (WHO) global pharmacovigilance database which contains case safety reports of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) was performed to test for sex -specific safety response to dual IL4/IL13 blockade by dupilumab. The information component (IC), a measure of the disproportionality of ADR occurrence, was evaluated and compared between males and females to identify potential sexual dimorphism. Results: Of the 94,065 ADRs recorded in the WHO global pharmacovigilance database, 2,001 (57.4%) were reported among female dupilumab users, and 1,768 (50.7%) were among males. Immune/autoimmune T-helper 1 (Th1)-, innate- and T-helper 17 (Th17)-driven diseases and degenerative ones were consistently reported with a stronger association with Dupilumab in males than females. Some adverse events were more robustly associated with Dupilumab in females. Conclusion: Dupilumab has an excellent safety profile, even though some ADRs may occur. The risk is higher among male patients, further studies, including ad hoc studies, are needed to establish causality.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".