ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2026
An integrative pharmacovigilance, network toxicology and molecular docking study on drug-induced cheilitis.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Pharmacovigilance and network toxicology analysis of risdiplam-associated adverse events in pediatric patients with spinal muscular atrophy.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Drug-induced cheilitis represents an inadequately comprehended adverse reaction, with limited understanding of its underlying mechanisms. This study employs an integrative approach, combining pharmacovigilance, network toxicology, and molecular docking methodologies, to systematically examine the phenomenon of drug-associated cheilitis. Methods: We conducted an analysis of 5,007 cheilitis reports obtained from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adverse Event Reporting System (FDA Adverse Event Reporting System, 2004-2025) by employing disproportionality analysis and multivariate logistic regression techniques. Utilizing network toxicology, we constructed protein-protein interaction networks and identified enriched pathways. Furthermore, molecular docking and 500 ns molecular dynamics simulations were employed to validate the binding interactions between high-risk pharmacological agents and core molecular targets. Results: Thirty-eight pharmaceuticals demonstrated significant associations with cheilitis, with isotretinoin being the most frequently reported (ROR = 42.61) and crisaborole exhibiting the most pronounced signal (ROR = 550.48). Female sex emerged as an independent risk factor (OR = 0.771), whereas age and weight appeared to offer modest protective effects. Network analysis identified Interleukin 6 (IL6), tumor necrosis factor (TNF), AKT Serine/Threonine Kinase 1 (AKT1), Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A (VEGFA) and Signal Transducer and Activator of Transcription 3 (STAT3) as central targets, with notable enrichment in the IL-17, TNF, and PI3K-Akt signaling pathways. Molecular docking studies indicated strong binding affinities (ranging from -8.1 to -6.2 kcal/mol), particularly for the afatinib-EGFR and capecitabine-IL-6 interactions. Molecular dynamics simulations confirmed the stability of these complexes, with MM/PBSA analysis highlighting key stabilizing residues. ADMET profiling predicted a high risk of drug-induced liver injury for four compounds, while lamotrigine demonstrated a favorable safety profile. Conclusion: This integrative framework connects population-level indicators with mechanistic forecasts, providing a translational model for comprehending, predicting, and managing drug-induced cheilitis.
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.