ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2026
Pharmacovigilance analysis of cutaneous adverse drug reactions for cetuximab, panitumumab, and necitumumab based on EudraVigilance and WHO VigiAccess.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies (mAbs)--cetuximab, panitumumab, and necitumumab--are cornerstone therapies for selected solid tumors but are frequently associated with cutaneous adverse drug reactions (ADRs). This study aimed to characterize and compare the dermatologic safety profiles of these agents using large-scale post-marketing pharmacovigilance data. Methods: A comprehensive pharmacovigilance analysis was conducted using aggregated ADR reports from the WHO VigiAccess and European Medicines Agency (EMA) EudraVigilance databases. Disproportionality analyses were performed using reporting odds ratios (RORs) and proportional reporting ratios (PRRs). Dermatologic ADR diversity and similarity were further evaluated using Shannon entropy, principal component analysis (PCA), and multidimensional scaling (MDS). Results: A total of 50,391, 18,806, and 355 ADR reports were identified for cetuximab, panitumumab, and necitumumab, respectively. Cutaneous ADRs accounted for up to 25% of all reported events. Panitumumab demonstrated the strongest association with skin-related toxicities (ROR = 1.51; PRR = 1.38), particularly acneiform dermatitis, pruritus, and xerosis. Cetuximab exhibited lower relative disproportionality despite higher absolute numbers of reported cases, whereas necitumumab showed a narrower dermatologic toxicity profile, potentially reflecting lower utilization or underreporting. Shannon entropy and dimensionality reduction analyses revealed greater heterogeneity of dermatologic ADRs associated with panitumumab compared with cetuximab and necitumumab. Significant differences in ADR distributions were observed between the WHO and EMA databases. Discussion: These findings highlight distinct agent-specific dermatologic toxicity signatures among anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies and demonstrate the value of real-world pharmacovigilance data in complementing clinical trial evidence. Improved recognition of differential toxicity patterns may support personalized monitoring and management strategies for patients receiving EGFR-targeted therapies.
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.