scholarly journals Disproportionality Analysis of Safety with Nafcillin and Oxacillin with the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS)

2019 ◽  
Vol 64 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tristan T. Timbrook ◽  
Lydia McKay ◽  
Jesse D. Sutton ◽  
Emily S. Spivak
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Event ◽  
Reporting System ◽  
Adverse Event Reporting System ◽  
Adverse Event Reporting ◽  
Lower Proportion ◽  
Reporting Odds Ratio ◽  
Disproportionality Analysis ◽  
Event Reporting ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Failure Reporting

ABSTRACT Antistaphylococcal penicillins such as nafcillin and oxacillin are among the first choices of treatment for severe invasive methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) infections, although there has been limited safety evaluations between individual agents. Using the FDA Adverse Event Reports System (FAERS), oxacillin was observed to have a lower proportion of reports of acute renal failure (reporting odds ratio [ROR], 5.3 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 3.1 to 9.3] versus 21.3 [95% CI, 15.8 to 28.6], respectively) and hypokalemia (ROR, 0.7 [95% CI, 0.1 to 4.8] versus 11.4 [95% CI, 7.1 to 18.3], respectively) than nafcillin.

scholarly journals Systematic analysis of safety profile for darunavir and its boosted agents using data mining in the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System database

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaojiang Tian ◽  
Yao Yao ◽  
Guanglin He ◽  
Yuntao Jia ◽  
Kejing Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Data Mining ◽  
Adverse Event ◽  
Reporting System ◽  
Proportional Reporting Ratio ◽  
Adverse Event Reporting System ◽  
Adverse Event Reporting ◽  
Reporting Odds Ratio ◽  
Systematic Analysis ◽  
Event Reporting ◽  
Exfoliative Dermatitis

AbstractThis current investigation was aimed to generate signals for adverse events (AEs) of darunavir-containing agents by data mining using the US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS). All AE reports for darunavir, darunavir/ritonavir, or darunavir/cobicistat between July 2006 and December 2019 were identified. The reporting Odds Ratio (ROR), proportional reporting ratio (PRR), and Bayesian confidence propagation neural network (BCPNN) were used to detect the risk signals. A suspicious signal was generated only if the results of the three algorithms were all positive. A total of 10,756 reports were identified commonly observed in hepatobiliary, endocrine, cardiovascular, musculoskeletal, gastrointestinal, metabolic, and nutrition system. 40 suspicious signals were generated, and therein 20 signals were not included in the label. Severe high signals (i.e. progressive extraocular muscle paralysis, acute pancreatitis, exfoliative dermatitis, acquired lipodystrophy and mitochondrial toxicity) were identified. In pregnant women, umbilical cord abnormality, fetal growth restriction, low birth weight, stillbirth, premature rupture of membranes, premature birth and spontaneous abortion showed positive signals. Darunavir and its boosted agents induced AEs in various organs/tissues, and were shown to be possibly associated with multiple adverse pregnant conditions. This study highlighted some novel and severe AEs of darunavir which need to be monitored prospectively.

scholarly journals Thrombocytopenia with Tedizolid and Linezolid

2017 ◽  
Vol 62 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Erica Yookyung Lee ◽  
Aisling R. Caffrey
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Event ◽  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Drug Administration ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Reporting System ◽  
Adverse Event Reporting System ◽  
Adverse Event Reporting ◽  
Reporting Odds Ratio ◽  
Event Reporting ◽  
Using Data

ABSTRACT Several studies have suggested the risk of thrombocytopenia with tedizolid, a second-in-class oxazolidinone antibiotic (approved June 2014), is less than that observed with linezolid (first-in-class oxazolidinone). Using data from the Food and Drug Administration adverse event reporting system (July 2014 through December 2016), we observed significantly increased risks of thrombocytopenia of similar magnitudes with both antibiotics: linezolid reporting odds ratio [ROR], 37.9 (95% confidence interval [CI], 20.78 to 69.17); tedizolid ROR, 34.0 (95% CI, 4.67 to 247.30).

Adverse event profile differences between rituximab and ocrelizumab: Findings from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting Database

2020 ◽  
pp. 135245852094998
Author(s):  
Natalia Gonzalez Caldito ◽  
Afsaneh Shirani ◽  
Amber Salter ◽  
Olaf Stuve
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Event ◽  
B Cell ◽  
Reporting System ◽  
Adverse Event Reporting System ◽  
Adverse Event Reporting ◽  
Reporting Odds Ratio ◽  
Event Reporting ◽  
Oral Herpes ◽  
Anti Cd20 ◽  
Related Reaction

Background: Rituximab and ocrelizumab are anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies that have shown a marked reduction in multiple sclerosis (MS) inflammatory activity. However, their real-world safety profile has not been adequately compared. Objective: To investigate the adverse event (AE) profile of rituximab and ocrelizumab reported to the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database. Methods: The FAERS database was filtered by indication (MS) and drug (rituximab or ocrelizumab). Disproportionality analyses including but not limited to reporting odds ratio (ROR) were conducted to identify drug–AE associations. A signal was detected if the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval of ROR (ROR025) exceeded 1. Results: There were 623 and 7948 reports for rituximab and ocrelizumab, respectively. The most frequent AEs with rituximab and ocrelizumab were infusion-related reaction (4.82%) and urinary tract infection (10.52%), respectively. The strongest drug–AE association for rituximab and ocrelizumab were ear pruritus (ROR025: 47.53) and oral herpes (ROR025: 38.99), respectively. Ocrelizumab was associated with an almost two times higher frequency of infections than rituximab (21.93% vs 11.05%, respectively). Conclusion: This study revealed differences in reporting AEs between rituximab and ocrelizumab. Infections were reported more frequently with ocrelizumab. Although speculative, a potentially different or more extensive B-cell depletion by ocrelizumab might explain these findings. Additional pharmacovigilance studies need to be performed to better characterize differences in the AE profile in B-cell-depleting therapies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document