Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40974228›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2026

Comparative analysis of the characteristics and trends of adverse drug reaction reports from patients in Japan and the Japanese Adverse Drug Event Report database.

Masami Tsuchiya, Ryohkan Funakoshi, Koichi Masuyama, Nariyasu Mano, Satoko Hori, Taku Obara

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Masami TsuchiyaDivision of Drug Informatics, Keio University Faculty of Pharmacy, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3846-0435
Ryohkan FunakoshiDepartment of Pharmacy, Kameda General Hospital, Kamogawa, Chiba, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1897-9689
Koichi MasuyamaRegulatory Science Laboratory, School of Pharmacy, Tokyo University of Pharmacy and Life Sciences, Tokyo, Japan.
Nariyasu ManoLaboratory of Biomolecule and Pathophysiological Chemistry, Graduate School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Tohoku University, Sendai, Miyagi, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1679-9024
Satoko HoriDivision of Drug Informatics, Keio University Faculty of Pharmacy, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4596-5418
Taku ObaraDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Tohoku University Hospital, Sendai, Miyagi, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3674-1674

Funding

Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development 22mk0101228h0001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsSpontaneous reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADR) after a product has reached the market is essential for drug safety. This study analysed patient ADR reports and compared them with reports from the Japanese Adverse Drug Event Report (JADER) database to identify differences and trends.

methodsADR reports from the Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency website, including patient reports from March 2019 to March 2024, and JADER reports from January 2019 to March 2024, were utilized. Information on demographics, drugs, ADR types and outcomes was analysed. Frequencies and comparisons between the two reporting groups were performed.

resultsA total of 2913 patient reports and 343 894 JADER reports were analysed. Patients were often younger (30-50 years) and mostly female, whereas JADER reports included older patients (60-80 years) and mostly male. Patients reported subjective symptoms, such as fatigue and headache, often associated with drugs targeting the central nervous system. In contrast, JADER reports focused on serious conditions, such as interstitial lung disease and pneumonia, which are commonly associated with anticancer drugs. Patient and professional ADR reports differed in focus. Patients highlighted quality-of-life-related symptoms, whereas professionals reported more serious medical conditions. Differences in demographics and reporting methods indicate that these systems are complementary. Offering more reporting options, such as telephone-based submissions, can make the system more inclusive.

conclusionsThe study highlights how patient ADR reports provide valuable insights into drug safety. Although differences exist, patient and professional reports improve monitoring after drug approval.

Indexed as

Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsDatabases, FactualDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsPharmacovigilanceAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overChildEast Asian PeopleFemaleHumansJapanMaleMiddle AgedQuality of Lifeadverse drug reaction reportingJapanese Adverse Drug Event Report databasepatient‐reported ADRs

Identifiers

PMID40974228
PMCPMC12850622

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.