ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Antibiotic-associated adverse events in bone and joint infections: a FAERS pharmacovigilance study.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Bone and joint infections (BJI) require prolonged antibiotic therapy that may amplify cumulative toxicity risk, yet indication-contextualized safety data remain sparse. Methods: Using the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS, 2004Q1-2025Q4; 20,006,981 deduplicated cases), we identified 9,072 cases involving 17 BJI-target antibiotics. Four disproportionality measures, namely reporting odds ratio (ROR), proportional reporting ratio (PRR), information component (IC), and empirical Bayes geometric mean (EBGM), were applied against the full FAERS database. We then performed BJI within-cohort contextualization, primary-suspect-only (PS-only) sensitivity analysis, exploratory XGBoost machine learning, and Weibull time-to-onset (TTO) modeling, in accordance with the READUS-PV reporting framework. Results: Of 153 drug-adverse drug event (ADE) pairs, 103 met the prespecified four-method robust full-FAERS signal criterion; 28 were retained after BJI within-cohort contextualization. Indication-supported signals included vancomycin-nephrotoxicity (within-cohort ROR 3.30, 95% CI 2.95-3.70), linezolid-hematologic toxicity (3.65, 3.21-4.16), ceftaroline-hematologic toxicity (4.81, 3.42-6.77), and ertapenem-neurotoxicity (4.76, 3.50-6.47). Several strong full-FAERS signals (e.g., fluoroquinolone-tendon and broad-spectrum-C. difficile infection) were attenuated within the BJI cohort or under PS-only restriction, highlighting the role of prescribing pattern and reporting-role confounding. Weibull modeling indicated predominantly early-onset reporting patterns. Conclusion: Multi-method, indication-contextualized FAERS analysis distinguishes BJI-supported from general reporting signals and provides a transparent framework for prioritizing monitoring during prolonged antibiotic therapy. Findings are hypothesis-generating and require validation in controlled observational studies. They prioritize safety signals rather than providing estimates of incidence, absolute risk, causality, dose-response, or renal-function effects.
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.