Sheikh, Mohammad S

Background The digital transformation in medical education is reshaping how clinical skills, such as point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS), are taught. In nephrology fellowship programs, POCUS is essential for enhancing diagnostic accuracy, guiding procedures, and optimizing patient management. To address these evolving demands, we developed an artificial intelligence (AI)-driven POCUS curriculum using a multiagent approach that integrates human expertise with advanced AI models, thereby elevating educational standards and better preparing fellows for contemporary clinical practice. Methods In April 2024, the Mayo Clinic Minnesota Nephrology Fellowship Program initiated a novel AI-assisted process to design a comprehensive POCUS curriculum. This process integrated multiple advanced AI models—including GPT-4.0, Claude 3.0 Opus, Gemini Advanced, and Meta AI with Llama 3—to generate initial drafts and iteratively refine content. A panel of blinded nephrology POCUS experts subsequently reviewed and modified the AI-generated material to ensure both clinical relevance and educational rigor. Results The curriculum underwent 12 iterative revisions, incorporating feedback from 29 communications across AI models. Key features of the final curriculum included expanded core topics, diversified teaching methods, enhanced assessment tools, and integration into inpatient and outpatient nephrology rotations. The curriculum emphasized quality assurance, POCUS limitations, and essential clinical applications, such as fistula/graft evaluation and software integration. Alignment with certification standards further strengthened its utility. AI models contributed significantly to the curriculum's foundational structure, while human experts provided critical clinical insights. Conclusion This curriculum, enhanced through a multiagent approach that combines AI and human collaboration, exemplifies the transformative potential of digital tools in nephrology education. The innovative framework seamlessly integrates advanced AI models with expert clinical insights, providing a scalable model for medical curriculum development that is responsive to evolving educational demands. The synergy between technological innovation and human expertise holds promising implications for advancing fellowship training. Future studies should evaluate its impact on clinical competencies and patient outcomes across diverse practice environments.

Abstract High-dose methotrexate (MTX) results in high rates of acute kidney injury (AKI), neutropenia, and hepatotoxicity. Glucarpidase is a recombinant enzyme that cleaves MTX, but clinical data supporting its use are scarce. We examined the association between glucarpidase administration and outcomes in adults with MTX-AKI from 28 cancer centers across the United States using a sequential target trial emulation framework. The primary end point was kidney recovery at hospital discharge, defined as survival to discharge with serum creatinine <1.5-fold baseline and without dialysis dependence. Key secondary end points were time to kidney recovery, neutropenia, and transaminitis on day 7, and time to death. Using multivariable logistic and Cox regression models, we compared outcomes in patients who received glucarpidase within 4 days following MTX initiation with those in patients who did not. Among 708 patients with MTX-AKI, 209 (29.5%) received glucarpidase. Overall, 183 (25.8%) had a primary end point event. Glucarpidase receipt was associated with a 2.70-fold higher adjusted odds of kidney recovery (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.69–4.31) compared with no glucarpidase receipt. Patients treated with glucarpidase also had faster time to kidney recovery (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.88; 95% CI, 1.18–3.33) and lower risks of grade ≥2 neutropenia (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.50; 95% CI, 0.28–0.91) and grade ≥2 transaminitis (aOR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.28–0.91) on day 7. There was no difference in time to death (aHR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.49–1.18). These data suggest glucarpidase may improve both renal and extrarenal outcomes in patients with MTX-AKI.

Background This study investigated the efficacy of ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4 in assessing drug safety for patients with kidney diseases, comparing their performance to Micromedex, a well-established drug information source. Despite the perception of non-prescription medications and supplements as safe, risks exist, especially for those with kidney issues. The study's goal was to evaluate ChatGPT's versions for their potential in clinical decision-making regarding kidney disease patients. Method The research involved analyzing 124 common non-prescription medications and supplements using ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4 with queries about their safety for people with kidney disease. The AI responses were categorized as “generally safe,” “potentially harmful,” or “unknown toxicity.” Simultaneously, these medications and supplements were assessed in Micromedex using similar categories, allowing for a comparison of the concordance between the two resources. Results Micromedex identified 85 (68.5%) medications as generally safe, 35 (28.2%) as potentially harmful, and 4 (3.2%) of unknown toxicity. ChatGPT-3.5 identified 89 (71.8%) as generally safe, 11 (8.9%) as potentially harmful, and 24 (19.3%) of unknown toxicity. GPT-4 identified 82 (66.1%) as generally safe, 29 (23.4%) as potentially harmful, and 13 (10.5%) of unknown toxicity. The overall agreement between Micromedex and ChatGPT-3.5 was 64.5% and ChatGPT-4 demonstrated a higher agreement at 81.4%. Notably, ChatGPT-3.5's suboptimal performance was primarily influenced by a lower concordance rate among supplements, standing at 60.3%. This discrepancy could be attributed to the limited data on supplements within ChatGPT-3.5, with supplements constituting 80% of medications identified as unknown. Conclusion ChatGPT's capabilities in evaluating the safety of non-prescription drugs and supplements for kidney disease patients are modest compared to established drug information resources. Neither ChatGPT-3.5 nor ChatGPT-4 can be currently recommended as reliable drug information sources for this demographic. The results highlight the need for further improvements in the model's accuracy and reliability in the medical domain.

The accurate interpretation of CRRT machine alarms is crucial in the intensive care setting. ChatGPT, with its advanced natural language processing capabilities, has emerged as a tool that is evolving and advancing in its ability to assist with healthcare information. This study is designed to evaluate the accuracy of the ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4 models in addressing queries related to CRRT alarm troubleshooting. This study consisted of two rounds of ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4 responses to address 50 CRRT machine alarm questions that were carefully selected by two nephrologists in intensive care. Accuracy was determined by comparing the model responses to predetermined answer keys provided by critical care nephrologists, and consistency was determined by comparing outcomes across the two rounds. The accuracy rate of ChatGPT-3.5 was 86% and 84%, while the accuracy rate of ChatGPT-4 was 90% and 94% in the first and second rounds, respectively. The agreement between the first and second rounds of ChatGPT-3.5 was 84% with a Kappa statistic of 0.78, while the agreement of ChatGPT-4 was 92% with a Kappa statistic of 0.88. Although ChatGPT-4 tended to provide more accurate and consistent responses than ChatGPT-3.5, there was no statistically significant difference between the accuracy and agreement rate between ChatGPT-3.5 and -4. ChatGPT-4 had higher accuracy and consistency but did not achieve statistical significance. While these findings are encouraging, there is still potential for further development to achieve even greater reliability. This advancement is essential for ensuring the highest-quality patient care and safety standards in managing CRRT machine-related issues.