ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025
Adverse events of ursodeoxycholic acid: a real-world pharmacovigilance study using FAERS (2004-2023).
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) has been widely used in the treatment of hepatobiliary disorders and its clinical application is more and more extensive. However, to our knowledge, there are currently no clinical and scientific studies on the safety of UDCA based on large populations. In this study, UDCA-related adverse events (AEs) were evaluated through data mining based on the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database. Methods: The AE reports induced by UDCA as the primary suspected drug were extracted from the FAERS database. Disproportionality analysis was performed to explore potential AE signals of UDCA using four robust algorithms, including reporting odds ratio (ROR), the proportional reporting ratio (PRR), the Bayesian confidence propagation neural network (BCPNN), and the Empirical Bayesian geometric mean (EBGM). The difference in UDCA-associated AE signals was also investigated concerning sex. Results: A total of 1,651 AEs were identified to be associated with UDCA. Common AEs consistent with the drug insert included diarrhea or loose stools, right upper abdominal pain, rash, and so on. Several unexpected AEs, such as interstitial lung disease and pancytopenia, were also identified. UDCA-related AEs affected 27 system organ classes (SOCs), and the signal intensity showed gender differences. Conclusion: This study investigated AEs associated with UDCA in both SOC and preferred terms (PTs) levels, providing valuable insights to the comprehensive landscape of AEs caused by UDCA. The results of this study help optimize the clinical use of UDCA and reduce its potential side effects, promoting its safe use in clinical application.
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.