ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2025
Evaluation of dermatologic adverse events associated with aromatase inhibitors: insights from the FAERS database.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 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.
- Lichenoid drug eruption induced by letrozole: a case report.Oxford medical case reports · 2026Article
- Assessing the risk of adverse drug events from combining aromatase inhibitors with CDK4/6 inhibitors using the FAERS and JADER databases.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Design, synthesis and anticancer evaluation of naphthalen-1-yloxyacetamide derivatives against MCF-7 cells.RSC advances · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study evaluates the risk of dermatologic adverse events (AEs) associated with aromatase inhibitors (AIs) through an analysis of data from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS). Methods: FAERS data from Q1 2004 to Q2 2024 were analyzed for dermatologic AEs related to AIs. A disproportionality analysis using reporting odds ratio (ROR) assessed AE risk, and the time to onset of these AEs was examined. Results: Out of 21,035,995 AE reports, 2,237 involved skin impairment. Sixty-one preferred terms (PTs) presented positive signals, including nail disorders, onychoclasis, and abnormal hair growth in patients on anastrozole, exemestane, or letrozole. The highest associations were with pseudo cellulitis (ROR = 57.73), anhidrosis (ROR = 48.68), and nail toxicity (ROR = 38.40). Strong associations were observed for anastrozole (ROR = 1.07, 95% confidence interval: 1.03-1.11) and exemestane (ROR = 1.1, 95% CI: 1.04-1.16), but not for letrozole. Eleven dermatologic PTs had onset times under 50 days, with the earliest at 2 days; the latest, skin ulcer, appeared at 241.5 days with exemestane. Conclusion: The findings provide substantial evidence of dermatologic AEs associated with AIs, particularly anastrozole and exemestane, emphasizing the importance of dermatologic monitoring during AI therapy and the need for further research into AI-induced dermatologic AEs.
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.