Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42540027›Full record

ArticleHealth services insights2026

Adverse Event Profiles of Monoclonal Antibodies: A Descriptive Analysis of FAERS Data.

Ghada Alem, Nehad Jaser Ahmed, Maram Ahmed, Mohamed Balaha, Ziyad Almalki, Abdullah Alahmari, Abdulla Alalwan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health services insights, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Ghada AlemClinical Pharmacy Department, College of Pharmacy, Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, Al-Kharj, Saudi Arabia.
Nehad Jaser AhmedClinical Pharmacy Department, College of Pharmacy, Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, Al-Kharj, Saudi Arabia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4215-6225
Maram AhmedDepartment of Business Administration, Zarqa University, Zarqa, Jordan.
Mohamed BalahaClinical Pharmacy Department, College of Pharmacy, Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, Al-Kharj, Saudi Arabia.
Ziyad AlmalkiClinical Pharmacy Department, College of Pharmacy, Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, Al-Kharj, Saudi Arabia.
Abdullah AlahmariClinical Pharmacy Department, College of Pharmacy, Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, Al-Kharj, Saudi Arabia.
Abdulla AlalwanClinical Pharmacy Department, College of Pharmacy, Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, Al-Kharj, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are bioengineered molecules designed to replicate the immune system's precise targeting of pathogens and abnormal cells. While monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are targeted therapies, they carry risks like immunogenic reactions and drug interactions. Objective: The current study utilizes FAERS to describe the distribution of reported adverse events, patient demographics, and reporting patterns associated with selected monoclonal antibody therapies. Methods: The analysis included all monoclonal antibody adverse event reports in FAERS through March 31, 2025, with subsequent reports and non-monoclonal antibody drugs excluded, and utilized descriptive statistics to present results as numbers and percentages. Results: FAERS data through March 31, 2025, for 18 monoclonal antibodies showed distinct adverse event (AE) patterns. Most AEs occurred in adults aged 18-64, with females reporting more events except for cancer-related mAbs such as cetuximab (67.09% males) and ipilimumab (64.15% males). Healthcare professionals were the primary reporters, though some drugs-like adalimumab (72.13%)-had mainly consumer reports. Common AEs included injection-site pain (7.44%), rash, in addition to reports categorized as "drug ineffective," a MedDRA preferred term used in FAERS to reflect reporter perception of treatment failure (e.g., 17.96% for secukinumab; 28.14% for tocilizumab). Conclusion: The most frequently reported events included treatment-ineffectiveness perceptions and administration issues, which warrant further investigation in controlled studies. Some reports included product use issues such as dose omission or incorrect administration. However, due to the spontaneous reporting nature of FAERS, the relationship between adherence-related issues and clinical outcomes cannot be definitively established. The findings of the study describe reporting patterns in FAERS and may serve as a basis for future pharmacovigilance or epidemiologic research.

Indexed as

adverse drug eventsdrug safetyFAERSmonoclonal antibodiespharmacovigilance

Identifiers

PMID42540027
PMCPMC13424930

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.