ArticleDrug safety2025
Investigation of the Role of Chemical Analysis in Causality Assessment of Herbal and Dietary Supplement-Induced Liver Injury.
Article in Drug safety, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Analysis of 386 alternative medicinal products implicated in liver injury reveal clinically relevant associations with potentially hepatotoxic botanicals, pharmaceutical adulteration, heavy metal contamination, and undisclosed animal content.Frontiers in gastroenterology (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe attribution of drug-induced liver injury (DILI) to specific herbal and dietary supplements (HDS) is confounded by inaccurate labels and undisclosed ingredients. The US Drug-Induced Liver Injury Network (DILIN) determines the attribution of injury to an agent through its structured expert opinion causality assessment process, but without the use of chemical analysis data of HDS. We aimed to determine the impact of chemical analysis of HDS products on prior causality assessment scores.
methodsObtained samples of HDS consumed by DILIN-enrolled patients were analyzed by high-performance liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (HPLC-MS). Chemical analysis data were compared to label accuracy and detect whether the product contained botanical and non-botanical compounds. A comparison of the causality scores reassessed with chemical analysis was compared with the original scores.
resultsA total of 54 previously adjudicated cases with chemical analysis available were reassessed for causality with chemical analysis data; reviewers were blinded to original causality scores. Using the chemical analysis data, 37% (n = 20) of the 54 cases were scored with a higher likelihood of DILI compared with the original causality scores; 14 of the 20 (70%) moved from probable to highly likely; 52% had no change in causality score; and 11% of cases were scored as a lower likelihood of DILI.
conclusionsOur study demonstrates that there is value in using HDS chemical analysis data in the causality assessment process for DILI. In more than a third of cases, chemical analysis of products led to an increased confidence in DILI attribution to HDS. These findings suggest that chemical analysis is an important tool in causality assessment for HDS agents, specifically in challenging situations, and further studies are needed to confirm its applicability in clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.