Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41287718›Full record

ArticleCureus2025

Famotidine-Induced Rash and Eosinophilia: A Case Report.

Abeera Junaid, Johann Graggaber

Abstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Abeera JunaidGeneral and Acute Internal Medicine, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, GBR.
Johann GraggaberClinical Pharmacology, Acute Internal Medicine and Endocrinology, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, GBR.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We report the case of a 77-year-old man who was admitted with a urinary tract infection and concurrent influenza A, who subsequently developed an unusual hypersensitivity reaction to famotidine. He initially received intravenous gentamicin followed by oral amoxicillin-clavulanic acid for the urinary tract infection. Oseltamivir and carbocisteine were prescribed for the flu. During admission, his proton pump inhibitor (PPI) was switched to famotidine due to hyponatremia. Four days later, he developed an itchy, erythematous maculopapular rash on his arms and legs. Initially localized to both extensor and flexural areas, the rash progressively spread to involve his torso over the next few days. A significant rise in eosinophils raised suspicion of a drug-induced reaction. Considering the timing of the rash and the patient's lack of prior adverse reactions to penicillin, famotidine was identified as the most probable causative agent for the rash. The rash improved following discontinuation of famotidine, supporting the diagnosis of famotidine-induced hypersensitivity reaction.

Indexed as

allergycutaneous-drug eruptiondrug-induced eosinophiliafamotidinemaculopapular rash

Identifiers

PMID41287718
PMCPMC12640432

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.