ArticleFrontiers in immunology2026
Comparative neuropsychiatric safety signals of tacrolimus versus cyclosporine in solid organ transplantation: ten-year FAERS pharmacovigilance study.
Article in Frontiers in immunology, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Neuropsychiatric toxicity is a recognized complication of calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) therapy; however, large-scale comparative assessments across tacrolimus immediate-release (IR), once-daily LCP-tacrolimus (LCPT), and cyclosporine remain limited. Methods: We performed a decade-long pharmacovigilance study using the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database from 2015 to 2025 to characterize the spectrum, seriousness, temporal trends, and drug-specific reporting signals of neuropsychiatric adverse events (AEs) in transplant recipients in whom tacrolimus IR, LCPT, or cyclosporine was listed as a suspect agent. Events were categorized as neurological, psychiatric, or combined neuropsychiatric. Disproportionality was assessed using reporting odds ratios (RORs) and proportional reporting ratios (PRRs). Results: A total of 5,437 neuropsychiatric AE reports were identified, involving tacrolimus IR (71.9%), cyclosporine (23.7%), and LCPT (4.5%). Most reports were neurological (74.1%), followed by psychiatric (17.1%) and combined neuropsychiatric events (8.8%). Serious outcomes were frequently reported (92.5%), including hospitalization (52.1%) and reported death (16.2%). Combined neuropsychiatric events had the highest hospitalization rate (62.1%); however, such outcomes should be interpreted in the context of complex clinical illness and treatment exposure rather than as directly attributable to CNI-related neuropsychiatric toxicity alone. Tremor demonstrated elevated reporting disproportionality for tacrolimus IR (ROR 1.97; PRR 1.78) and LCPT (ROR 2.42; PRR 1.97). In contrast, cyclosporine showed no tremor signal but demonstrated elevated disproportionality for encephalopathy (ROR 1.73; PRR 1.45), insomnia (ROR 1.87; PRR 1.76), and anxiety (ROR 1.50; PRR 1.48). Reporting increased from 2015 to 2019 and remained elevated through 2025. Conclusion: These findings suggest distinct drug-specific neuropsychiatric reporting patterns among CNIs in FAERS. However, given the inherent limitations of spontaneous reporting systems and differences in real-world utilization across CNIs, these findings should be interpreted as hypothesis-generating pharmacovigilance signals rather than evidence of causation, incidence, or comparative risk. They highlight the potential clinical relevance of neuropsychiatric tolerability when individualizing CNI selection, monitoring, and formulation strategies, and support further integration of pharmacovigilance data with pharmacokinetic and registry-level evidence to improve individualized risk assessment.
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.