ArticlePediatric allergy and immunology : official publication of the European Society of Pediatric Allergy and Immunology2026
Pediatric spontaneous-reporting patterns for biologics approved or used for asthma: Analysis of the FDA adverse event reporting system.
Article in Pediatric allergy and immunology : official publication of the European Society of Pediatric Allergy and Immunology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Pediatric spontaneous-reporting patterns for biologics approved or used for asthma: Analysis of the FDA adverse event reporting system.Pediatric allergy and immunology : official publication of the European Society of Pediatric Allergy and Immunology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPediatric post-marketing evidence for biologics used for asthma remains limited and uneven across agents. We characterized pediatric spontaneous-reporting patterns for biologics approved or used for asthma in the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System.
methodsWe analyzed pediatric reports involving omalizumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab, dupilumab, and tezepelumab from 2015 through 2025. Reports were summarized by age, sex, reporting year, outcomes, and preferred terms. Serious-outcome and indication-linked classifications were performed. Disproportionality was assessed using reporting odds ratios, proportional reporting ratios, chi-square statistics, and information components. Pediatric signals were compared with adult findings and interpreted according to method agreement, report volume, and sparse-data restrictions.
resultsWe identified 5155 pediatric reports. Dupilumab accounted for 3787 reports (73.5%) and omalizumab for 1152 (22.3%). Serious outcomes were reported in 1273 reports (24.7%), with substantial variation across biologics. Dupilumab showed prominent injection-site, dermatologic, and ocular reporting, whereas omalizumab showed respiratory, asthma-related, hypersensitivity-related, and vital-sign reporting. Of 43 pediatric signals supported by at least two disproportionality criteria, 31 were also identified in adults. After restricting to terms with at least five reports, 33 signals remained for the main analysis. Narrow anaphylaxis-related domains occurred in 17 dupilumab, 113 omalizumab, 3 mepolizumab, 3 benralizumab, and no tezepelumab reports. Among dupilumab reports, 83.4% were classified as asthma-related and 15.2% as mixed indications.
conclusionsPediatric FAERS reports showed biologic-specific reporting patterns. These patterns may reflect potential drug-related events, underlying disease activity, treatment failure, indication mix, monitoring, and reporting practices. The findings are hypothesis-generating and do not establish incidence, causality, or asthma-specific safety profiles.
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.