Ryan (ryan@themedialab.agency)
2025-08-29 11:23:01

@CC Kitanovski, can you give the response after looking at MediLens and Dupixent for lymphomas?

IMG_4218
CC Kitanovski (ckitanovski@shield-legal.com)
2025-08-29 11:41:41

@Cameron Rentch @James Turner @Ryan @Joe Santana @James Scott Met with James Scott & Ryan to discuss Medilens and look at Dupixent. Medilens was able to show that we have > 600 skin-cancer-related FDA adverse events, which is certainly significant.

Medilens also pulls up all related published literature, which I would read through to see if we have 5 published articles, published within the last 10 years, with an odds ratio of > 1.75. That is the rough criteria I've established in order to convince myself (before I try to convince a lawyer) that there is enough science to support causation.

With Dupixent, specifically, we do not yet appear to have enough science to support causation. That said, the volume of FDA adverse events indicate this is one worth keeping an eye on. Medilens allows those two conclusions to be reached in a shorter amount of time than it would take me to manually pour over research databases searching for all of it on my own.

We agreed that adding in a feature to allow users to "flag" or "favorite" drugs they want to watch. We also discussed adding a feature to alert the user of when a drug reaches a set number of published research articles with high enough odds ratios that it meets causation criteria (and would likely survive Daubert).

Let me know if there are any questions. Great work, @James Scott! Looking forward to using Medilens for more research! 🥳

🙏 James Scott
CC Kitanovski (ckitanovski@shield-legal.com)
2025-08-29 11:42:45

@Cameron Rentch @James Turner @Ryan @Joe Santana @James Scott Met with James Scott & Ryan to discuss Medilens and look at Dupixent. Medilens was able to show that we have > 600 skin-cancer-related FDA adverse events, which is certainly significant.

Medilens also pulls up all related published literature, which I would read through to see if we have 5 published articles, published within the last 10 years, with an odds ratio of > 1.75. That is the rough criteria I've established in order to convince myself (before I try to convince a lawyer) that there is enough science to support causation.

With Dupixent, specifically, we do not yet appear to have enough science to support causation. That said, the volume of FDA adverse events indicate this is one worth keeping an eye on. Medilens allows those two conclusions to be reached in a shorter amount of time than it would take me to manually pour over research databases searching for all of it on my own.

We agreed that adding in a feature to allow users to "flag" or "favorite" drugs they want to watch. We also discussed adding a feature to alert the user of when a drug reaches a set number of published research articles with high enough odds ratios that it meets causation criteria (and would likely survive Daubert).

Let me know if there are any questions. Great work, @James Scott! Looking forward to using Medilens for more research! 🥳

James Scott (jamesscott@shield-legal.com)
2025-08-29 11:45:16

@James Scott has joined the conversation

Cameron Rentch (cameron@internetthings.com)
2025-08-29 12:09:14

@CC Kitanovski @Ryan @James Scott interesting. There obviously are some reports of this in volume somewhere, wondering why our system is not showing anything related to lymphoma? Also no firms will take skin cancer cases, not enough damages and too many other risk factors.

Cameron Rentch (cameron@internetthings.com)
2025-08-29 12:09:23

Let’s re run and keep digging

CC Kitanovski (ckitanovski@shield-legal.com)
2025-08-29 12:18:10

@Cameron Rentch @James Scott I misspoke. The column that lymphoma would fall under was "neoplasm" not melanoma and not skin cancer. Neoplasms had > 600 results.

James Scott (jamesscott@shield-legal.com)
2025-08-29 12:21:11

@Cameron Rentch @CC Kitanovski yes cameron there are reports out there even from us going through the clinical trial data there are only 7 reported studies of dupixent / lymphoma used to search in medilens cross referenced to the actual site of these 7 studies none of them had actionable scientific facts to go on hr odds risk ration scores. They did mention there are increasing reports at of end 2024 however there is no actionable study / data to back up the claims

James Scott (jamesscott@shield-legal.com)
2025-08-29 12:22:22

@Cameron Rentch @CC Kitanovski yes cameron there are reports out there even from us going through the clinical trial data there are only 7 reported studies of dupixent / lymphoma used to search in medilens cross referenced to the actual site of these 7 studies none of them had actionable scientific facts to go on hr odds risk ration scores. They did mention there are increasing reports at of end 2024 however there is no actionable study / data to back up the claims

Ryan (ryan@themedialab.agency)
2025-08-29 12:25:48

@Cameron Rentch, what we did realize is that we need to build a Alert Notification model into MediLens that looks for the drug, how many clinical studies have been done, with at least 3, and if those studies have Odds Ratios over 1.7 threshold. Then we can have the system "alert us" for potential new drugs in the same way @CC Kitanovski is doing it now for the briefs.

Cameron Rentch (cameron@internetthings.com)
2025-08-29 12:50:34

Ok @CC Kitanovski can you put together a brief based on findings and reference law firms advertising etc? Similar to the online gaming. Thanks everyone!

CC Kitanovski (ckitanovski@shield-legal.com)
2025-08-29 14:52:55

@Cameron Rentch Absolutely, will get started on it today 🙂