ArticleArchives of dermatological research2024
Real-world individual and comparative analysis of adverse event reporting for adalimumab and etanercept using public FDA adverse event reporting system data.
Article in Archives of dermatological research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveWe analyzed adverse events (AEs) related to adalimumab and etanercept using the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) to detect unexpected AEs. Subsequently, we compared the discrepancy in serious outcomes involving the same injection site reactions (ISRs) between two different medications.
methodsFour algorithms, including reporting odds ratio (ROR), proportional reporting ratio (PRR), Bayesian confidence propagation neural network (BCPNN), and the multi-item gamma Poisson shrinker (MGPS) were used to identify AE signals. These signals were standardized to preferred terms (PTs), and categorized at the system organ classification (SOC) level using the MedDRA system for further analysis. Serious outcomes were defined as death, disability, hospitalization, or life-threatening. The term "multiple serious outcomes" refers to instances that involve two or more of these serious consequences.
resultsAdalimumab had 186,697 AE reports (736 PTs and 28 SOCs), while etanercept had 289,989 AE reports (294 PTs and 21 SOCs). At the PT level, we identified new unexpected AEs in adalimumab that related to multiple serious outcomes like intestinal obstruction, osteoarthritis, hernia, paternal drugs affecting the fetus, intestinal fistula, anal fistula, and postoperative adhesion. At the PT level of etanercept, we discerned unanticipated AEs related to multiple serious outcomes such as knee arthroplasty, joint destruction, finger deformity, and Felty's syndrome. At the SOC level, we paid special attention to the gastrointestinal disorders in adalimumab, with many unexpected PTs, as well as the vascular disorders and cardiac disorders in etanercept. For both drugs, the most common SOC is general disorders and administration site conditions, with ISRs being the most prevalent AEs within this category. The results indicate that etanercept has a greater variety of serious outcomes involving shared ISRs than adalimumab (p < 0.01) and also exhibits higher reported rates for these serious consequences (p < 0.01).
conclusionUpon individual analysis, we identified unanticipated AEs in adalimumab and etanercept, respectively. Comparative analysis suggests that, despite similar ISRs, etanercept necessitates heightened vigilance due to its potential for more serious outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39738670What 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.