Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41348382›Full record

ArticleDrug safety2026

Unsuspected Adverse Drug Reactions to Dermatologic Medications: An Epidemiological Hypothesis-Free Screening Study of Real-World Data in Denmark.

Thomas Delvin, Anette Bygum, Lars Christian Lund, Jacob Harbo Andersen, Jesper Hallas

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Drug safety, 2026. 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

5 authors.

Thomas DelvinClinical Pharmacology, Pharmacy and Environmental Medicine, Department of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, 5000, Odense C, Denmark. tdelvin@health.sdu.dk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7224-7833
Anette BygumClinical Institute, University of Southern Denmark, 5000, Odense C, Denmark.
Lars Christian LundClinical Pharmacology, Pharmacy and Environmental Medicine, Department of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, 5000, Odense C, Denmark.
Jacob Harbo AndersenClinical Pharmacology, Pharmacy and Environmental Medicine, Department of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, 5000, Odense C, Denmark.
Jesper HallasClinical Pharmacology, Pharmacy and Environmental Medicine, Department of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, 5000, Odense C, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to dermatological drugs may be underrecognized due to limitations in traditional surveillance. Systematic, hypothesis-free screening for such ADRs using real-world data is an underutilized approach in dermatology.

objectiveThe aim was to systematically screen commonly used dermatological drugs for potential unknown ADR signals using nationwide Danish health register data and to evaluate sequence symmetry analysis (SSA) as an epidemiological screening method in pharmacovigilance. This evaluation focuses on identifying key signals for dedicated follow-up studies, not on an exhaustive analysis of all potential associations.

methodsA nationwide, register-based, hypothesis-free screening study using Danish national health registers was conducted. The study cohort comprised 5,877,711 Danish residents prescribed dermatological drugs or relevant immunosuppressants linked to a dermatological indication between 1996 and 2022. Data were analyzed from 1995 to 2024. Exposures were the first dispensation of included dermatological drugs. The primary outcome measure was the trend-adjusted sequence ratio (SR), an estimate of the incidence rate ratio for rare events, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), for incident drug-drug and drug-diagnosis pairs within ±12-month windows of exposure initiation. To assess directionality, supplementary case-crossover (CCO) analyses were performed on top-ranked signals, estimating odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs.

resultsThe screening of 22.5 million incident exposure prescriptions yielded 4010 drug-drug and 22,234 drug-diagnosis pairs. After filtering and review, several potential unknown ADR signals were identified and prioritized. Signals were manually reviewed and categorized by clinical experts to identify plausible novel ADRs. Notable associations (adjusted SR [95% CI]; CCO OR [95% CI]) included isotretinoin with systemic corticosteroids (1.44 [1.35-1.53]; 1.78 [1.61-1.98]) and hemorrhoid treatments (1.58 [1.49-1.68]; 1.83 [1.68-1.98]); azathioprine with bone-modifying drugs (1.42 [1.33-1.53]; 1.57 [1.36-1.81]); terbinafine with lipid-lowering therapy (1.04 [1.01-1.08]; 1.14 [1.07-1.20]) and vitamin B12/folate use (1.20 [1.14-1.26]; 1.12 [1.02-1.22]); and clobetasol with atrial fibrillation/flutter (1.11 [1.06-1.17]; 1.07 [1.00-1.14]).

conclusionsSystematic hypothesis-free screening using SSA on nationwide real-world data can effectively identify potential unknown ADRs for dermatological drugs. The specific signals found in this study potentially have clinical implications and warrant further targeted investigations to support causality. This approach supports the implementation of routine real-world data screening to supplement traditional pharmacovigilance.

Indexed as

Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsDermatologic AgentsDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overChildCohort StudiesDenmarkFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPharmacovigilanceRegistriesDermatologic Agents

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.