ArticleJAMA ophthalmology2025
Systemic Drugs Associated With Maculopathy.
Article in JAMA ophthalmology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Hydrochlorothiazide and chlorthalidone use and glaucoma risk: pharmacovigilance analysis and nationwide cohort study.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Systemic medications may have unrecognized macular toxic effects; early identification might be important for vision preservation. Objectives: To identify systemic drugs potentially associated with maculopathy via pharmacovigilance reporting and to evaluate their macular adverse effects in a nationwide encounter database. Design, Setting, and Participants: This 2-part study included (1) disproportionality analysis for candidate identification, using 15 748 maculopathy-related individual case safety reports from the US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) between July 2014 and December 2023, and (2) a population-based cohort study for association evaluation, using the South Korean Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service (HIRA) database among users of the candidate drugs, covering approximately 50 million individuals. Data were analyzed from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2023. Exposure: Use of systemic drugs identified as candidate signals in FAERS. Main Outcomes and Measures: Reporting odds ratios for signal detection in FAERS and incidence rate ratios, hazard ratios, and cumulative incidence of maculopathy in HIRA. Results: Five systemic drugs with underrecognized macular toxic effects-fingolimod, apixaban, paclitaxel, ibrutinib, and sildenafil-were identified among the top 30 maculopathy signals in FAERS. In HIRA, the incidence rate ratios for maculopathy following exposure (vs preexposure) were 1.92 (95% CI, 0.62-5.96) for fingolimod, 3.08 (95% CI, 2.68-3.54) for apixaban, 2.85 (95% CI, 1.62-5.02) for paclitaxel, 3.71 (95% CI, 2.58-5.34) for ibrutinib, and 2.75 (95% CI, 2.17-3.48) for sildenafil. The cumulative incidence rates ranged from 4.4% (fingolimod) to 15.7% (apixaban). Dose-response relationships were observed for paclitaxel (hazard ratio, 2.01 [95% CI, 1.77-2.29] for third vs first quartile) and ibrutinib (hazard ratio, 4.82 [95% CI, 1.39-16.81] for fourth vs first quartile). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that the integration of pharmacovigilance signal detection and nationwide health claims analysis identified associations of maculopathy with apixaban, paclitaxel, ibrutinib, and sildenafil. This combined approach offers a potentially cost-effective, robust method for identifying systemic drugs with possibly underrecognized macular adverse effects.
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.