ArticleScientific reports2025
Analysis and comparison of adverse events of colistin administered by different routes based on the FAERS database.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and validation of a machine learning-based clinical decision support tool for stratifying intravenous medication risk in hospitalized patients with heart failure.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2026Article
- Safety Profiles of Polymyxins, Aminoglycosides, and Imipenem/Cilastatin/Relebactam (IMI/REL) in the Treatment of Gram-Negative Infections: A Literature Review.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Efficacy and Safety of Different Colistin Administration Routes for Nosocomial Pneumonia Caused by Carbapenem-Resistant Organisms: A Single Centre, Open Label, Prospective Cohort Study.Drug design, development and therapy · 2026Article
- Unveiling the hidden risk of caspofungin: insights from three adverse event reporting systems and network pharmacology integration.Frontiers in pharmacology · 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
Abstract
objectiveTo analyze and compare the incidence of adverse events (AEs) associated with different administration routes of colistin, with the aim of providing a reference for its safe and effective clinical use.
methodsAdverse event (AE) reports related to colistin were retrieved from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database. The reporting trends were analyzed, and the Reporting Odds Ratio (ROR) and Proportional Reporting Ratio (PRR) for colistin-associated AEs were calculated. A comparative analysis was conducted to examine the occurrence of AEs under different administration routes of colistin.
resultsA total of 13,043 AE reports were extracted from the FAERS database. Further analysis of 176 key AEs associated with colistin indicated a significant increase in the number of reports after 2021. The year and country of the reports showed heterogeneity across different administration routes. Intravenous (IV) administration of colistin was associated with the highest proportion of AEs, and heterogeneity was also observed in the types of AEs reported for inhaled and oral (PO) administration routes.
conclusionCompared to inhaled and PO administration routes, IV administration of colistin is more likely to result in AEs such as nephrotoxicity and drug ineffectiveness. Additionally, there are significant differences in the types of AEs associated with colistin across different administration routes.
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.