ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2026
Comparative safety profiles of risankizumab versus guselkumab: a pharmacovigilance study based on the FAERS database.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Risankizumab and guselkumab are two leading interleukin-23 (IL-23) inhibitors for treating immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. While effective, a direct comparison of their real-world safety profiles is lacking. Understanding the distinct differences in their adverse event (AE) profiles is crucial for clinicians to make appropriate treatment decisions. Research Design and Methods: We conducted a disproportionality analysis on post-marketing data obtained from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database from Q3 2017 to Q2 2025 to detect and compare the AE signals of guselkumab and risankizumab. Results: A total of 22,470 and 48,141 AE reports for guselkumab and risankizumab, respectively, were analyzed. The analysis revealed markedly different safety profiles. Risankizumab showed significant signals for skin cancer (particularly in patients ≥65 years), intestinal obstruction, and other newly identified serious events such as myocardial infarction and cerebrovascular accident. In contrast, guselkumab's primary signals were dominated by medication management issues like "product dose omission issue" and "accidental exposure to product," which correlated with reports of decreased therapeutic effect. Unique, unlabeled signals for guselkumab included a different spectrum of AEs, such as Hodgkin's disease, pemphigoid, and autoimmune thyroiditis. Furthermore, the median time-to-onset was significantly shorter for guselkumab (62 days) compared to risankizumab (168 days). Conclusion: Guselkumab and risankizumab exhibit divergent real-world safety profiles, challenging the notion of a uniform class effect. Clinicians should be vigilant for malignancies and serious systemic events with risankizumab, particularly in the elderly, while prioritizing patient education for guselkumab to prevent administration errors. These findings support individualized treatment strategies to minimize drug-specific risks.
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.