ArticleBMC pharmacology & toxicology2025
Risk comparison of adverse reactions between gemcitabine monotherapy and gemcitabine combined with albumin-bound paclitaxel in pancreatic cancer: insights from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database.
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.
- Disproportionality analysis of drug-induced erectile dysfunction using FAERS database.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Mortality from sepsis among middle-aged and elderly patients with pancreatic cancer: CDC WONDER 1999 To 2023.Frontiers in oncology · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPancreatic cancer (PC) is a highly aggressive malignancy with limited treatment options. Although gemcitabine monotherapy (G treatment) has long been a standard treatment, combination therapies, such as gemcitabine with albumin-bound paclitaxel (AG treatment), have shown improved outcomes and were approved by the FDA for the PC. However, the AG treatment is also associated with increased adverse events (AEs), which remain inadequately evaluated in real-world settings.
methodsWe utilized the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) to conduct a large-scale pharmacovigilance analysis comparing the safety profiles of G and AG treatments for PC. By analyzing adverse event data from the third quarter of 2013 to the second quarter of 2024 and quantifying AE signals with reporting odds ratio (ROR) and proportional reporting ratio (PRR) methods, we compared the risk of AEs between the groups. Time to onset (TTO), subgroup and logistic regression analyses were also performed.
resultsThe study revealed a higher proportion of male (n = 2307, 54.1%) and elderly patients (age ≥ 65years, n = 2172, 50.9%) in the AG treatment group compared to the G treatment group. We found 17 preferred terms with positive signals at the top 50 common AEs, especially in gastrointestinal and blood systems. Cardiac and neurological AEs also needed to be vigilant. Biliary sepsis and infectious enterocolitis were newly identified AEs and deserve attention. Median TTO was 34 (IQR: 8-103) days (G) and 41 (IQR: 10-104) days (AG), with most AEs occurring within the first month (48.3% and 44%). Subgroup analysis revealed that male patients using the AG treatment had the highest risk of immune-mediated hepatitis (ROR = 23.51, 95% CI = 3.21-172.1), while elderly patients had elevated risks for presyncope (ROR = 24.84, 95% CI = 3.40-181.28) and falls (ROR = 18.60, 95% CI = 2.53-136.97). Logistic regression showed higher-risk fatal outcomes in males (adjusted OR = 1.42, 95% CI = 1.15-1.76, P < 0.01) and elderly patients (adjusted OR = 1.36, 95% CI = 1.10-1.69, P < 0.01).
conclusionThis research offers critical safety insights in real-world settings, emphasizing patients at heightened AEs risk and informing clinical decision-making in PC 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.