ReviewDrug safety1993
Adverse effects of newer cephalosporins. An update.
Review in Drug safety, 1993. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 45 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety of Cefazolin in Pregnant Patients with Documented Penicillin Allergy: A Retrospective Cohort Study.The Canadian journal of hospital pharmacy · 2025Article
- Signal Detection of Adverse Drug Reactions of Cephalosporins Using Data from a National Pharmacovigilance Database.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Cefixime-induced angle closure and transient myopic shift in a healthy individual; A case report.American journal of ophthalmology case reports · 2020Article
- Update on the adverse effects of antimicrobial therapies in community practice.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2020Review
- Review
- AKI associated with cardiac surgery.Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN · 2015Review
- Review
- Drug-induced diarrhoea.Drug safety · 2000Review
- Antibiotics in neonatal infections: a review.Drugs · 1999Review
- Ceftazidime. An update of its antibacterial activity, pharmacokinetic properties and therapeutic efficacy.Drugs · 1995Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While classifications into generations according to antimicrobial activity has helped clinicians incorporate the increasing number of cephalosporins into their pharmacological repertoire, adverse effects among the different agents fail to follow similar categories. In general, cephalosporins are fairly well tolerated antibiotics, and toxicity has been limited to specific agents. Subtle differences in chemical structure and pharmacokinetics can influence the potential for adverse effects. The route of administration may result in minor adverse reactions, including thrombophlebitis and pain. The most common adverse effects of cephalosporins are allergic reactions, occurring in 0.9 to 3.2% of patients. Cephalosporins have very rarely been associated with haematological toxicity (less than 1% of patients), but specific agents have been associated with neutropenia, hypoprothrombinaemia, haemolytic anaemia, and problems with platelet production and function. Other reactions include localised gastrointestinal disturbances, hepatotoxicity (e.g. biliary sludging), nephrotoxicity and mild central nervous system effects. The cephalosporins are generally well tolerated in the paediatric population. Very few interactions have been observed between cephalosporins and other drugs, largely because cephalosporins do not affect the microsomal P450 hepatic enzyme system. While cephalosporins are considered to be relatively 'safe' drugs, the introduction of newer members warrants continued careful observation for reporting of adverse drug reactions.
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.