SynthesisBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2026
Analysis of interstitial lung disease in pharmacovigilance databases: Coding challenges and interpretation biases-An update.
Synthesis in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Analysis of interstitial lung disease in pharmacovigilance databases: Coding challenges and interpretation biases-An update.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Pooled it
- Imatinib-Associated Interstitial Lung Disease with a Fibrotic NSIP Pattern on Transbronchial Lung Cryobiopsy: A Case Report and Review of the Literature.Reports (MDPI) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimClinically, interstitial lung disease (ILD) is a heterogeneous group of respiratory disorders. Due to their low incidence, pharmacovigilance database analysis is useful to detect them. Precise diagnosis is challenging as well as coding in these databases. Query criteria are among the key elements for a good signal detection. This study aimed to investigate interpretation biases related to ILD coding in PV databases.
methodsMedDRA Preferred Terms (PT) included in the broad Standardized MedDRA Query (SMQ) 'ILD' for the top five known pneumotoxic drugs was described in VigiBase by reporting year (2000-2024), country, and reporter type. Then, a systematic literature review was conducted to identify PV studies using disproportionality analyses to detect drug-induced ILD reporting signals, assessing query strategies, analysis units, and bias consideration.
resultsThe most frequently implicated known pneumotoxic drugs were amiodarone, methotrexate, nivolumab, pembrolizumab, and everolimus. On average per year, the PTs 'ILD' represented <40% of all PTs in the broad SMQ 'ILD'. Terminology evolution (e.g., emergence of 'immune-mediated lung disease' after 2019) and national preferences (France/Japan vs. USA/UK/Germany) were observed. Among 22 reviewed accessible studies, 50% used PT-based queries, only 27% performed sensitivity analyses, and none discussed the impact of MedDRA coding evolution on analysis reliability. DISCUSSION/
conclusionOur analysis highlights the substantial variability in MedDRA coding that may affect the reliability of drug safety analyses. Moreover, studies conducted on PV databases do not sufficiently assess the relevance of query criteria and their impact on the results. We propose a few practical recommendations.
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.