Michael Irizarry, Ilona Surick, Ari Michael, Lynn D Kramer
{"title":"对Xing等人的回应:利卡耐单抗上市后的安全性问题:一项基于FDA不良事件报告系统数据库的药物警戒研究。","authors":"Michael Irizarry, Ilona Surick, Ari Michael, Lynn D Kramer","doi":"10.1186/s13195-025-01735-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A recent paper published a lecanemab analysis with data from the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database. While the authors mention the limitations of FAERS, such as \"voluntary (underreporting), the inability to establish causality, reporting bias, data quality issues, and the absence of a denominator, which precludes calculating incidence rates\", they proceed with generalizations, clinical conclusions, and even treatment recommendations based on the crude disproportionality analysis. Consideration of post-marketing safety reports, including those found in the FAERS database, is an essential component of pharmacovigilance. However, FDA guidance [2, 3] highlights that: (1) \"Rates of occurrence cannot be established with reports,\" (2) \"Documenting one or more of these outcomes in a report does not necessarily mean that the suspect product(s) named in the report was the cause of the outcomes,\" and (3) \"Importantly, the FAERS data by themselves are not an indicator of the safety profile of the drug.\" The FAERS database includes reports from many sources, including reports by companies, as well as from health care professionals and consumers. The reports in the FDA database have significant limitations, including submission of incomplete, inaccurate, untimely, duplicate, relatedness to drug uncertainty, and/or unverified information. Therefore, broader generalizations, clinical conclusions, and treatment recommendations should not be made based solely on FAERS databases analyses.</p>","PeriodicalId":7516,"journal":{"name":"Alzheimer's Research & Therapy","volume":"17 1","pages":"92"},"PeriodicalIF":7.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12023665/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Response to Xing et al.: post-marketing safety concerns with Lecanemab: a pharmacovigilance study based on the FDA adverse event reporting system database.\",\"authors\":\"Michael Irizarry, Ilona Surick, Ari Michael, Lynn D Kramer\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13195-025-01735-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>A recent paper published a lecanemab analysis with data from the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database. While the authors mention the limitations of FAERS, such as \\\"voluntary (underreporting), the inability to establish causality, reporting bias, data quality issues, and the absence of a denominator, which precludes calculating incidence rates\\\", they proceed with generalizations, clinical conclusions, and even treatment recommendations based on the crude disproportionality analysis. Consideration of post-marketing safety reports, including those found in the FAERS database, is an essential component of pharmacovigilance. However, FDA guidance [2, 3] highlights that: (1) \\\"Rates of occurrence cannot be established with reports,\\\" (2) \\\"Documenting one or more of these outcomes in a report does not necessarily mean that the suspect product(s) named in the report was the cause of the outcomes,\\\" and (3) \\\"Importantly, the FAERS data by themselves are not an indicator of the safety profile of the drug.\\\" The FAERS database includes reports from many sources, including reports by companies, as well as from health care professionals and consumers. The reports in the FDA database have significant limitations, including submission of incomplete, inaccurate, untimely, duplicate, relatedness to drug uncertainty, and/or unverified information. Therefore, broader generalizations, clinical conclusions, and treatment recommendations should not be made based solely on FAERS databases analyses.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7516,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Alzheimer's Research & Therapy\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"92\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12023665/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Alzheimer's Research & Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13195-025-01735-5\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Alzheimer's Research & Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13195-025-01735-5","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Response to Xing et al.: post-marketing safety concerns with Lecanemab: a pharmacovigilance study based on the FDA adverse event reporting system database.
A recent paper published a lecanemab analysis with data from the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database. While the authors mention the limitations of FAERS, such as "voluntary (underreporting), the inability to establish causality, reporting bias, data quality issues, and the absence of a denominator, which precludes calculating incidence rates", they proceed with generalizations, clinical conclusions, and even treatment recommendations based on the crude disproportionality analysis. Consideration of post-marketing safety reports, including those found in the FAERS database, is an essential component of pharmacovigilance. However, FDA guidance [2, 3] highlights that: (1) "Rates of occurrence cannot be established with reports," (2) "Documenting one or more of these outcomes in a report does not necessarily mean that the suspect product(s) named in the report was the cause of the outcomes," and (3) "Importantly, the FAERS data by themselves are not an indicator of the safety profile of the drug." The FAERS database includes reports from many sources, including reports by companies, as well as from health care professionals and consumers. The reports in the FDA database have significant limitations, including submission of incomplete, inaccurate, untimely, duplicate, relatedness to drug uncertainty, and/or unverified information. Therefore, broader generalizations, clinical conclusions, and treatment recommendations should not be made based solely on FAERS databases analyses.
期刊介绍:
Alzheimer's Research & Therapy is an international peer-reviewed journal that focuses on translational research into Alzheimer's disease and other neurodegenerative diseases. It publishes open-access basic research, clinical trials, drug discovery and development studies, and epidemiologic studies. The journal also includes reviews, viewpoints, commentaries, debates, and reports. All articles published in Alzheimer's Research & Therapy are included in several reputable databases such as CAS, Current contents, DOAJ, Embase, Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition, MEDLINE, PubMed, PubMed Central, Science Citation Index Expanded (Web of Science) and Scopus.