ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2024
Capecitabine-associated gastrointestinal ulceration, haemorrhage, and obstruction: a pharmacovigilance analysis based on the FAERS.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Adverse events of capecitabine in gastric cancer patients: a real-world pharmacovigilance study based on the FAERS database.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Pembrolizumab-Induced Colitis With Concurrent Capecitabine in Triple-Negative Breast Carcinoma: A Case Report.Cureus · 2026Article
- Cross-national pharmacovigilance of drug-induced intestinal obstruction: disproportionality signals in FAERS and external validation in JADER.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Capecitabine has been reported to be associated with severe gastrointestinal (GI) adverse drug reactions (gastrointestinal ulceration, haemorrhage, and obstruction). However, statistical correlations have not been demonstrated, and specific GI adverse drug reactions, such as GI obstruction, are not listed on its label. Aim: We aimed to determine the associations between capecitabine and GI ulceration, haemorrhage, or obstruction among patients with breast cancer by examining data from the United States Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS). Methods: We performed disproportionality analysis of GI ulceration, haemorrhage, and obstruction by evaluating the reporting odds ratio (ROR) and the information component (IC) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: We identified 279 patients with capecitabine-associated GI ulceration, haemorrhage, or obstruction reported between 1 January 2004 and 31 December 2020. One-fourth of the cases of GI ulceration, haemorrhage, or obstruction resulted in death. Capecitabine as a drug class had disproportionately high reporting rates for GI ulceration [ROR 1.94 (1.71-2.21); IC 0.80 (0.60-0.99)], haemorrhage [ROR 2.27 (1.86-2.76); IC 0.99 (0.69-1.28)], and obstruction [ROR 2.19 (1.63-2.95); IC 0.96 (0.51-1.40)]. Conclusion: Pharmacovigilance research on the FAERS has revealed a slight increase in reports of GI ulceration, haemorrhage, and obstruction in capecitabine users, which may cause serious or deadly consequences. In addition to the adverse reactions described in the package insert, close attention should be paid to GI obstruction to avoid discontinuation or life-threatening outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.