ArticleThe Journal of international medical research2026
Signal detection of drug-induced esophageal ulcer across 20 years of real-world study: Focus on 49 high-risk medicines.
Article in The Journal of international medical research, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
ObjectiveTo systematically identify drug-induced esophageal ulcer and address existing knowledge gaps.MethodsWe conducted a real-world study using the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System database from Q1 2004 to Q4 2024. Disproportionality analyses were performed to evaluate drug-induced esophageal ulcer risk. Data for each drug were merged and screened using the RxNax platform to recalculate drug exposure, proportional reporting ratio, reporting odds ratio, and chi-squared values. High-risk drugs classified by anatomical therapeutic chemical classification system were cross-checked with Side Effect Resource, product labels, and published literature.ResultsA total of 12,763 drug-induced esophageal ulcer cases were identified. Forty-nine high-risk drugs, spanning nine anatomical therapeutic chemical classification system classes, were detected, including antineoplastics and immunomodulators (Class L), systemic anti-infectives (Class J), and drugs affecting the musculoskeletal system (Class M). Aspirin, alendronic acid, and doxycycline were most frequently reported; doxycycline, clindamycin, and alendronic acid generated the strongest safety signals. Antineoplastics/immunomodulators (anatomical therapeutic chemical classification system L) had the highest cumulative proportional reporting ratio, primarily driven by tacrolimus, mycophenolic acid, and sunitinib. Notably, tacrolimus, sunitinib, meclofenamic acid, clopidogrel, and erlotinib were associated with esophageal ulcers but remain unlabeled for this risk.ConclusionsThis study provides a comprehensive drug-induced esophageal ulcer risk profile, highlighting high-risk drugs beyond commonly recognized agents. These findings can inform safer prescribing practices, patient counseling, and targeted pharmacovigilance.
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.