ArticleBMC pharmacology & toxicology2025
Comparative safety signals of dopamine agonists: psychiatric and cardiovascular risks derived from FDA adverse event reporting system (FAERS) data.
Article in BMC pharmacology & toxicology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Case Report: Near-fatal adverse effects of dopamine agonist for the treatment of restless legs syndrome.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone versus levodopa/benserazide plus pramipexole in Chinese patients with Parkinson's disease experiencing wearing off.Frontiers in neurology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDopamine receptor agonists (DAs) are widely used as first-line therapeutic agents for Parkinson's disease. However, comparative clinical trials assessing their safety profiles are limited. This study aims to compare adverse event (AE) data across various DAs to inform personalized treatment strategies.
methodsAE reports with DAs as the "primary suspicion (PS)" were extracted from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database, covering 67 quarters from the second quarter of 2007 to the fourth quarter of 2023. Four disproportionality analysis methods, including the reporting odds ratio (ROR), proportional reporting ratio (PRR), Bayesian confidence propagation neural network (BCPNN) and multi-item gamma Poisson shrinker (MGPS), were employed to evaluate the risk of AEs.
resultsA total of 19,745,533 DA-related AEs reports were analyzed. The six DAs-pramipexole, ropinirole, cabergoline, rotigotine, bromocriptine and apomorphine-generated 269, 246, 202, 163, 146, and 135 preferred terms positive signals, respectively. Non-ergot DAs (pramipexole, ropinirole, rotigotine and apomorphine) were primarily associated with psychiatric disorders and reported more hallucinations than ergot-derived dopamine agonists (ergot-DAs), with ropinirole showing a slightly higher signal intensity than pramipexole (ROR = 15.76 vs. 11.23). Pramipexole demonstrated the most significant signal for impulse control disorders (ICDs). Compared with pramipexole and ropinirole, rotigotine generally exhibits milder signals in terms of psychiatric disorders such as hallucinations, ICDs, and sleep-related AEs. Administration site-related AEs were more prominent in rotigotine and apomorphine users. Ergot-DAs exhibited higher signal intensities for cardiac disorders, with cabergoline also showing a notable signal for amnestic symptoms (ROR = 340.54), which is not mentioned in the drug label.
conclusionThis study elucidates the distinct safety profiles of six DAs. Non-ergot DAs are primarily associated with psychiatric AEs, while administration-related AEs are more notable for rotigotine and apomorphine. Ergot-DAs present a higher risk for cardiac valvulopathies. These findings highlight the importance of individualized treatment considerations in clinical practice, emphasizing the need to formulate appropriate treatment plans on patients' specific conditions.
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.