ArticleKansas journal of medicine
Comparative Analysis of Reported Adverse Events with Nirsevimab and Palivizumab in the FAERS Database.
Article in Kansas journal of medicine. 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: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) remains a leading cause of hospitalization among infants. Palivizumab has long been used for RSV prophylaxis in high-risk infants, whereas nirsevimab is a newer long-acting monoclonal antibody approved for broader use. Although clinical trials have demonstrated comparable safety profiles, comparative post-marketing safety data remain limited. Authors of this study compared reported adverse events associated with palivizumab and nirsevimab using the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS). Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional pharmacovigilance study was conducted using FAERS reports. Adverse events were classified according to the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (Med-DRA) System Organ Classes. Comparative analyses were performed using chi-square tests and binary logistic regression, with palivizumab as the reference group. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were reported. Results: A total of 2,021 reports met the inclusion criteria, including 1,380 for palivizumab and 641 for nirsevimab. Compared with palivizumab reports, nirsevimab reports had higher odds of including injury, poisoning, and procedural complications (OR, 7.55; 95% CI, 5.57-10.35) and skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders (OR, 2.55; 95% CI, 1.51-4.33). Nirsevimab reports had lower odds of including infections and infestations (OR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.40-0.65), gastrointestinal disorders (OR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.15-0.52), investigations (OR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.18-0.68), and respiratory, thoracic, and mediastinal disorders (OR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.51-0.80). Conclusions: Nirsevimab and palivizumab demonstrated distinct post-marketing adverse event reporting patterns. Continued post-marketing surveillance is warranted to further characterize the safety profiles of both agents.
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.