MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400724181 · doi:10.3390/antib13030059

Adverse Events of PD-1, PD-L1, CTLA-4, and LAG-3 Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: An Analysis of the FDA Adverse Events Database

2024· article· en· W4400724181 on OpenAlexaff
Connor Frey, Mahyar Etminan

Bibliographic record

VenueAntibodies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdverse effectCTLA-4PD-L1Immune systemDatabaseMedicineImmunologyComputer sciencePharmacologyImmunotherapyT cell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aimed to identify the 25 most prevalent adverse events (AEs) associated with FDA-approved immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs)-specifically, PD-1, PD-L1, CTLA-4, and LAG-3 inhibitors-using data from the FDA Adverse Events Reporting System (FAERS), a publicly available repository of reported drug adverse events, and AERSMine, an open-access pharmacovigilance tool, to investigate these adverse events. For PD-1 inhibitors, the most common AEs were diarrhea, fatigue, and pyrexia, with notable instances of neutropenia and hypothyroidism, particularly with toripalimab and dostarlimab. PD-L1 inhibitors also frequently caused pyrexia, diarrhea, and fatigue, with interstitial lung disease and hypothyroidism showing a class effect, and drug-specific AEs such as hepatotoxicity and chills. CTLA-4 inhibitors predominantly resulted in diarrhea and colitis, with ipilimumab frequently causing pyrexia and rash, while tremelimumab exhibited unique AEs such as biliary tract infection. The LAG-3 inhibitor relatlimab reported fewer AEs, including pyrexia and pneumonia. Rare but significant AEs across all inhibitors included myocarditis and myasthenia gravis. This study provides a detailed overview of the 25 most common AEs associated with ICIs, offering valuable insights for clinical decision-making and AE management. Further research is necessary to elucidate the mechanisms underlying these AEs and to develop targeted interventions to enhance the safety and efficacy of ICI therapy in patients with cancer.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations37
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAntibodiesSame topicCancer Immunotherapy and BiomarkersFrench-language works237,207