ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Disproportionality analysis of adverse event reporting with aspirin, statins, and their co-exposure in FAERS, 2004-2025.
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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To characterize and compare adverse-event reporting patterns for aspirin without statins, statins without aspirin, and aspirin-statin co-exposure in the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS), and to explore statistical reporting-interaction signals. Methods: We analyzed FAERS reports from 2004 Q1 through 2025 Q1. Active-comparator disproportionality analyses compared aspirin-statin co-exposure with aspirin-without-statin and statin-without-aspirin reports using the reporting odds ratio (ROR), proportional reporting ratio (PRR), Bayesian confidence propagation neural network (BCPNN), and empirical Bayesian geometric mean (EBGM), followed by Benjamini-Hochberg false discovery rate (BH-FDR) correction. Candidate preferred terms (PTs) common to both active-comparator analyses underwent adjusted statistical interaction analyses using four exposure groups, including a neither-drug reference. Primary models retained missing age, sex, and reporter type as explicit Unknown categories, and a complete-case sensitivity analysis excluded reports with missing adjustment covariates. Results: After deduplication, 18,932,599 unique FAERS reports were retained. The active-comparator analysis included 134,479 aspirin-without-statin reports, 202,565 statin-without-aspirin reports, and 70,806 aspirin-statin co-exposure reports. Among 9,332 and 9,736 PTs tested in the two active-comparator analyses, 119 and 254 PTs remained after prespecified signal-detection criteria and BH-FDR correction, respectively; 42 PTs were common to both comparisons. Adjusted interaction models were reliably estimable for 40 candidates, and 31 PTs met both additive and multiplicative reporting-interaction criteria. Missingness was substantial for age (42.33%), sex (12.12%), and reporter type (4.35%). The complete-case dataset retained 53.83% of reports, and 21 of the 31 primary both-scale-positive PTs remained jointly positive. Conclusions: Aspirin-statin co-exposure showed distinct adverse-event reporting patterns in FAERS. The identified signals are exploratory statistical reporting interactions and do not establish increased incidence, clinical risk, causality, or pharmacological drug-drug interactions. Only 21 of the 31 primary both-scale-positive PTs remained jointly positive in the complete-case sensitivity analysis, reinforcing the need for cautious interpretation and validation in denominator-based pharmacoepidemiologic datasets.
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.