ArticleFrontiers in medicine2024
Regional diversity in drug-induced lung diseases among the USA, European Union, and Japan.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perioperative Durvalumab for Resectable NSCLC: Updated Outcomes for Japanese Patients in AEGEAN.Cancer science · 2026Article
- Evolving phase I oncology trials in the precision medicine era: design, outcomes, and geographic access.ESMO real world data and digital oncology · 2026Article
- Targeted Therapy-Induced Interstitial Lung Disease in NSCLC: Mechanisms, Clinical Signatures, and a Precision Medicine Roadmap.Drug design, development and therapy · 2026Review
- Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors and Interstitial Lung Disease: A Disproportionality Analysis Using the European Post-marketing EudraVigilance Database.Drugs - real world outcomes · 2025Article
- Regorafenib Induced Interstitial Pneumonia in a Patient With Refractory Rectal Cancer.Respirology case reports · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Drug-induced lung disease (DILD) is a considerable and potentially fatal adverse event with poorly understood risk factors. Large-scale, data-driven analyses investigating regional discrepancies in DILD incidence are lacking. The aim of this study was to investigate the potential association among DILD prevalence, regional differences and other factors based on large-scale data base. Methods: This retrospective observational study analyzed spontaneous adverse event reports from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database between January 2010 and December 2020. Regional disparities in DILD incidence were assessed among reports from the United States of America (USA), the European Union (EU), and Japan (JP). Using multivariate logistic regression accounting for age, sex, and reporting years, we calculated the reporting odds ratios (RORs) with 95% confidence intervals. Subgroup analyses were performed for different types of anticancer agents, including tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs), and cytotoxic agents. Results: Regional differences in RORs were observed for anticancer drugs in reports from JP and the EU compared with those from the USA (JP, ROR 4.432; EU, ROR 1.291) and for non-anticancer drugs (JP, ROR 3.481; EU, ROR 1.086). Significantly higher RORs were observed for all anticancer drug regimens reported in JP than in the USA (TKIs, ROR 3.274; ICIs, ROR 2.170; ADCs, ROR 2.335; cytotoxic agents, ROR 3.989). The EU reports exhibited higher RORs for TKIs and cytotoxic agents than the USA reports, with no significant differences in ICIs or ADCs (TKIs, ROR 1.679; ICIs, ROR 1.041; ADCs, ROR 1.046; cytotoxic agents, ROR 1.418). Conclusion: The prevalence of DILD in JP, the EU, and the USA differed. These findings have important implications in evaluating the safety profiles of drugs and patient safety in drug development and clinical practice. This study is the first to identify regional differences in DILDs using a large global database.
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.