ArticleTherapeutic innovation & regulatory science2025
Exploring Clinical Studies and the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) Database for nirogacestat-related Adverse Events.
Article in Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Nirogacestat is the first drug specifically approved for desmoid tumours (DTs), rare, locally invasive tumours originating from connective tissue. This study aimed to explore potential safety concerns associated with nirogacestat, thereby providing references and research directions for subsequent clinical studies. We extracted data on nirogacestat from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database between Q4 2023 and Q4 2024 and mined adverse events (AEs) using the reporting odds ratio (ROR). For a separate retrospective analysis, we searched articles from PubMed, Cochrane, and EMBASE from the establishment of the databases until January 25, 2025.The study included 588 patients who were administered nirogacestat. Among all AEs, 89.78% were classified as non-serious. The most frequently reported preferred terms included diarrhoea [ROR (95% CI): 10.58 (9.22-12.13)], nausea [ROR (95% CI): 6.00 (5.06-7.12)], fatigue [ROR (95% CI): 3.77 (3.11-4.58)]. Disproportionality analysis revealed high signal strength for ovarian dysfunction [ROR (95% CI): 963.62 (306.61-3028.55)], ovarian failure [ROR (95% CI): 254.92 (101.73-638.79)], decreased blood phosphorus [ROR (95% CI): 107.66 (64.14-180.70)] and photopsia [ROR (95% CI): 91.19 (54.41-152.83)]. Notably, the risk ratios for alopecia, dermatitis acneiform, and ovarian toxicity were significantly higher in the nirogacestat group than in the placebo group. Despite the wide use of nirogacestat, most common AEs are not serious. Nevertheless, healthcare workers should proactively monitor patients for indicators of ovarian toxicity and hepatotoxicity. Additionally, photopsia and haematuria may be newly identified AEs. Further studies are required to validate our findings and explain the causal relationship between nirogacestat and AEs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40637806What 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.