ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025
Linear IgA bullous dermatosis secondary to drugs: a real-world pharmacovigilance study of the FDA adverse event reporting system.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The cutaneous mirror: leveraging drug-induced skin phenotypes as early visual risk signals for systemic toxicity, a comprehensive review.Frontiers in drug safety and regulation · 2026Review
- Pemphigoid associated with quinolone antibiotics: a real-world pharmacovigilance study of the FDA adverse event reporting system and literature-based evidence.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Linear IgA Bullous Dermatosis in an Elderly Patient Following Meloxicam and Candesartan Use: A Case Report.Cureus · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Linear IgA bullous dermatosis (LABD) is a rare autoimmune blistering disease. The induction of LABD by medications is a critical issue, with previous studies highlighting the link between specific drugs and the onset of LABD. This study aims to assess the reported associations between LABD and numerous available medications using the FDA adverse event reporting system (FAERS). Methods: The study encompassed FAERS reports spanning the years 2004-2024. Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) was used to identify cases of LABD. The Reporting Odds Ratio, Proportional Reporting Ratio, Bayesian Confidence Propagation Neural Network, and Empirical Bayes Geometric Mean were calculated to assess the reported associations between available drugs and LABD. A significant statistical association was considered when a drug signal met the criteria of all four algorithms. Results: In the FAERS database analysis, we identified 1,394 adverse event (AE) reports associated with LABD. The gender distribution of reports was relatively balanced, with the highest proportion in the 66-85 age group. The United States had the highest number of reports. Vancomycin and Amoxicillin were the most frequently reported drugs, with 559 and 58 reports, respectively. Through disproportionality analysis, we identified 34 drugs significantly associated with AEs of LABD, including antibiotics, antifungal medications, analgesics, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, cardiovascular medications, and calcium channel blockers, among which the antibiotic Vancomycin showed the highest association. These results emphasize the need for further clinical attention to the safety of specific medications. Conclusion: This is the first real-world study using the FAERS database to investigate drug-induced LABD. LABD is closely associated with antibiotic medications. Close monitoring of patients is required when these medications are used clinically to promptly detect and manage potential AEs such as LABD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.