ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2024
Real-world pharmacovigilance analysis of galsulfase: a study based on the FDA adverse event reporting system (FAERS) database.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Safety assessment of apremilast: real-world adverse event analysis from the FAERS database.Archives of dermatological research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Associated with enzyme deficiencies causing glycosaminoglycans (GAGs) accumulation, mucopolysaccharidosis type VI (MPS VI) is lysosomal storage disorder. In the treatment of MPS VI, galsulfase (Naglazyme) is commonly used as an enzyme replacement therapy (ERT). There remains a need for comprehensive real-world data on its safety and associated adverse events (AEs). Objective: An analysis of the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database will be conducted to identify potential risks and adverse reactions associated with galsulfase in real-life settings. Methods: The FAERS database was used to extract data from Q2 2005 to Q4 2023. A total of 20,281,876 reports were analyzed after duplicate elimination, with 3,195 AE reports related to galsulfase identified. The association between galsulfase and AEs was investigated by utilizing four algorithms: reporting odds ratio (ROR), proportional reporting ratio (PRR), Bayesian confidence propagation neural network (BCPNN), and multi-item gamma Poisson shrinker (MGPS). The analysis focused on the timing of onset, signs of AEs, and clinical significance. Results: Twenty seven organ systems were involved, and significant system organ classes (SOCs) included respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders, and infections and infestations. At the PT level, 72 PTs corresponding to 15 SOCs were identified, with some AEs not previously mentioned in the product label. AEs associated with galsulfase had a median onset time of 1,471 days, with over half of the cases occurred within the first 5 years of treatment initiation. Conclusion: This investigation delivers an exhaustive and indicative assessment of galsulfase's safety profile, grounded in authentic, real-world evidence. The findings emphasis the importance of continuous safety surveillance and the emergence of new AEs. The identification of previously unreported urologic adverse events, such as glomerulonephritis membranous and nephritic syndrome, warrants further investigation. The study emphasizes the need for enhanced pharmacovigilance to ensure patient safety and the effectiveness of galsulfase treatment.
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.