吉西他滨单药治疗和吉西他滨联合白蛋白结合紫杉醇治疗胰腺癌不良反应的风险比较:来自FDA不良事件报告系统(FAERS)数据库的见解

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Puen Jiang, Kezhen Zong, Dadi Peng, Baoyong Zhou, Zhongjun Wu
{"title":"吉西他滨单药治疗和吉西他滨联合白蛋白结合紫杉醇治疗胰腺癌不良反应的风险比较:来自FDA不良事件报告系统(FAERS)数据库的见解","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":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11924625/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"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\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11924625/pdf/\",\"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}","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

摘要

背景:胰腺癌(PC)是一种高度侵袭性的恶性肿瘤,治疗选择有限。尽管吉西他滨单药治疗(G治疗)长期以来一直是一种标准治疗,但联合治疗,如吉西他滨与白蛋白结合紫杉醇(AG治疗),已经显示出改善的结果,并被FDA批准用于PC。然而,AG治疗也与不良事件(ae)增加有关,这在现实环境中仍未得到充分评估。方法:我们利用FDA不良事件报告系统(FAERS)进行大规模药物警戒分析,比较G和AG治疗PC的安全性。通过分析2013年第三季度至2024年第二季度的不良事件数据,采用报告优势比(ROR)和比例报告比(PRR)方法对AE信号进行量化,比较两组之间AE的风险。发病时间(TTO)、亚组和logistic回归分析也进行了。结果:AG治疗组男性患者(n = 2307, 54.1%)和老年患者(年龄≥65岁,n = 2172, 50.9%)比例高于G治疗组。我们在前50个常见ae中发现了17个具有积极信号的首选术语,特别是在胃肠道和血液系统中。心脏和神经系统的不良反应也需要警惕。胆道脓毒症和感染性小肠结肠炎是新发现的ae,值得关注。中位TTO为34 (IQR: 8-103)天(G)和41 (IQR: 10-104)天(AG),大多数ae发生在第一个月内(48.3%和44%)。亚组分析显示,使用AG治疗的男性患者发生免疫介导性肝炎的风险最高(ROR = 23.51, 95% CI = 3.21-172.1),而老年患者发生晕厥前(ROR = 24.84, 95% CI = 3.40-181.28)和跌倒(ROR = 18.60, 95% CI = 2.53-136.97)的风险较高。Logistic回归显示男性的死亡风险更高(调整后OR = 1.42, 95% CI = 1.15-1.76, P)。结论:该研究在现实环境中提供了关键的安全性见解,强调了ae风险较高的患者,并为PC治疗的临床决策提供了信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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.

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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 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.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信