Risk comparison of adverse reactions between gemcitabine monotherapy and gemcitabine combined with albumin-bound paclitaxel in pancreatic cancer: insights from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database.

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY BMC Pharmacology & Toxicology Pub Date : 2025-03-19 DOI:10.1186/s40360-025-00884-5
Puen Jiang, Kezhen Zong, Dadi Peng, Baoyong Zhou, Zhongjun Wu
{"title":"Risk comparison of adverse reactions between gemcitabine monotherapy and gemcitabine combined with albumin-bound paclitaxel in pancreatic cancer: insights from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database.","authors":"Puen Jiang, Kezhen Zong, Dadi Peng, Baoyong Zhou, Zhongjun Wu","doi":"10.1186/s40360-025-00884-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Pancreatic cancer (PC) is a highly aggressive malignancy with limited treatment options. Although gemcitabine monotherapy (G treatment) has long been a standard treatment, combination therapies, such as gemcitabine with albumin-bound paclitaxel (AG treatment), have shown improved outcomes and were approved by the FDA for the PC. However, the AG treatment is also associated with increased adverse events (AEs), which remain inadequately evaluated in real-world settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We utilized the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) to conduct a large-scale pharmacovigilance analysis comparing the safety profiles of G and AG treatments for PC. By analyzing adverse event data from the third quarter of 2013 to the second quarter of 2024 and quantifying AE signals with reporting odds ratio (ROR) and proportional reporting ratio (PRR) methods, we compared the risk of AEs between the groups. Time to onset (TTO), subgroup and logistic regression analyses were also performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study revealed a higher proportion of male (n = 2307, 54.1%) and elderly patients (age ≥ 65years, n = 2172, 50.9%) in the AG treatment group compared to the G treatment group. We found 17 preferred terms with positive signals at the top 50 common AEs, especially in gastrointestinal and blood systems. Cardiac and neurological AEs also needed to be vigilant. Biliary sepsis and infectious enterocolitis were newly identified AEs and deserve attention. Median TTO was 34 (IQR: 8-103) days (G) and 41 (IQR: 10-104) days (AG), with most AEs occurring within the first month (48.3% and 44%). Subgroup analysis revealed that male patients using the AG treatment had the highest risk of immune-mediated hepatitis (ROR = 23.51, 95% CI = 3.21-172.1), while elderly patients had elevated risks for presyncope (ROR = 24.84, 95% CI = 3.40-181.28) and falls (ROR = 18.60, 95% CI = 2.53-136.97). Logistic regression showed higher-risk fatal outcomes in males (adjusted OR = 1.42, 95% CI = 1.15-1.76, P < 0.01) and elderly patients (adjusted OR = 1.36, 95% CI = 1.10-1.69, P < 0.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This research offers critical safety insights in real-world settings, emphasizing patients at heightened AEs risk and informing clinical decision-making in PC treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":9023,"journal":{"name":"BMC Pharmacology & Toxicology","volume":"26 1","pages":"65"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Pharmacology & Toxicology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40360-025-00884-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Pancreatic cancer (PC) is a highly aggressive malignancy with limited treatment options. Although gemcitabine monotherapy (G treatment) has long been a standard treatment, combination therapies, such as gemcitabine with albumin-bound paclitaxel (AG treatment), have shown improved outcomes and were approved by the FDA for the PC. However, the AG treatment is also associated with increased adverse events (AEs), which remain inadequately evaluated in real-world settings.

Methods: We utilized the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) to conduct a large-scale pharmacovigilance analysis comparing the safety profiles of G and AG treatments for PC. By analyzing adverse event data from the third quarter of 2013 to the second quarter of 2024 and quantifying AE signals with reporting odds ratio (ROR) and proportional reporting ratio (PRR) methods, we compared the risk of AEs between the groups. Time to onset (TTO), subgroup and logistic regression analyses were also performed.

Results: The study revealed a higher proportion of male (n = 2307, 54.1%) and elderly patients (age ≥ 65years, n = 2172, 50.9%) in the AG treatment group compared to the G treatment group. We found 17 preferred terms with positive signals at the top 50 common AEs, especially in gastrointestinal and blood systems. Cardiac and neurological AEs also needed to be vigilant. Biliary sepsis and infectious enterocolitis were newly identified AEs and deserve attention. Median TTO was 34 (IQR: 8-103) days (G) and 41 (IQR: 10-104) days (AG), with most AEs occurring within the first month (48.3% and 44%). Subgroup analysis revealed that male patients using the AG treatment had the highest risk of immune-mediated hepatitis (ROR = 23.51, 95% CI = 3.21-172.1), while elderly patients had elevated risks for presyncope (ROR = 24.84, 95% CI = 3.40-181.28) and falls (ROR = 18.60, 95% CI = 2.53-136.97). Logistic regression showed higher-risk fatal outcomes in males (adjusted OR = 1.42, 95% CI = 1.15-1.76, P < 0.01) and elderly patients (adjusted OR = 1.36, 95% CI = 1.10-1.69, P < 0.01).

Conclusion: This research offers critical safety insights in real-world settings, emphasizing patients at heightened AEs risk and informing clinical decision-making in PC treatment.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Pharmacology & Toxicology
BMC Pharmacology & Toxicology PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACYTOXICOLOGY&nb-TOXICOLOGY
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
87
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Pharmacology and Toxicology is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of chemically defined therapeutic and toxic agents. The journal welcomes submissions from all fields of experimental and clinical pharmacology including clinical trials and toxicology.
期刊最新文献
Oxidative stress and anti-oxidant status in children with sepsis. Risk comparison of adverse reactions between gemcitabine monotherapy and gemcitabine combined with albumin-bound paclitaxel in pancreatic cancer: insights from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database. A disproportionality analysis of adverse events associated with loop diuretics in the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS). A new RP-HPLC approach for estimation of potential impurities of Fosamprenavir - method development and validation. A single-dose, four-cycle, fully repetitive crossover bioequivalence of dabigatran etexilate in Chinese.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1