ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025
Post-marketing safety of pentosan polysulfate sodium: a 21-year pharmacovigilance analysis of the FAERS database.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To characterize the post-marketing safety profile of pentosan polysulfate sodium (PPS) using the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database. Methods: This pharmacovigilance study analyzed FAERS data spanning from the first quarter of 2004 to the first quarter of 2025. Disproportionality analysis, using the reporting odds ratio (ROR), was performed to detect adverse drug event (ADE) signals. A gender-specific analysis was also performed. The time-to-onset (TTO) of ADEs was evaluated through descriptive statistics, the Kaplan-Meier method, and Weibull parametric modeling. Results: The study collected 11,471 reports with PPS as the primary suspected drug. The reporting frequency and strongest signals were overwhelmingly concentrated in the 'Eye Disorders' system organ class (SOC), with pigmentary maculopathy demonstrating an exceptionally high ROR. Significant non-ocular signals were also identified, including depression and anxiety. A gender-specific analysis revealed that maculopathy signals were prominently observed among females, while males exhibited distinct associations with gastrointestinal and urinary adverse events. The TTO analysis ( Conclusion: This 21-year real-world analysis confirms that safety signals for PPS show a distinct long-latency risk profile, most critically vision-threatening maculopathy. The study highlights potential psychiatric adverse events not currently documented in the drug's label and reveals gender-specific risk profiles. These findings emphasize the need for vigilant, sustained ophthalmologic screening and broader safety monitoring for all patients receiving PPS therapy.
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.