ArticleJournal of pharmaceutical policy and practice2026
Signal mining and safety profile analysis of lapatinib: a pharmacovigilance analysis of the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database.
Article in Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparative safety signals of carboplatin and cisplatin in lung cancer: a pharmacovigilance study based on FAERS.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: There remains a gap in understanding lapatinib's real-world safety, particularly in rare adverse events (AEs). Thus, this study aims to evaluate lapatinib's safety by (1) performing data mining of the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS); and (2) detecting and analysing safety signals associated with lapatinib that may require monitoring. Methods: FAERS data from March 2007 to July 2024 were analysed via OpenVigil (version 2.1). AEs were categorised into preferred terms (PTs) and system organ classes (SOCs) using the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities. We used descriptive analysis to analyse report characteristics and four signal detection algorithms to quantify risk signals, including Proportional Reporting Ratio (PRR), Reporting Odds Ratio (ROR), Multi-item Gamma Poisson Shrinker (MGPS), and Bayesian Confidence Propagation Neural Network (BCPNN). Top novel strong suspected AEs were further assessed using a case-by-case analysis. The Naranjo algorithm was utilised to determine the potential relation between the suspected AEs and lapatinib. Results: From 25,506,744 retrieved reports, 18,407 PTs identified lapatinib as the primary suspect, resulting in 10,959 signals analysed. AEs were predominantly females (77.9%) and individuals aged 18-64 (45.38%). Lapatinib-induced AEs affected 16 systems, with 155 lapatinib-related PTs; 115 of these were significantly disproportionate, including 57 new PTs. While gastrointestinal and dermatological disorders were the most common, the latter was more strongly associated with lapatinib, with diarrhoea being the only strong gastrointestinal signal. Notably, cardiac events were less reported, and the top new AEs based on signal strength, such as hypocapnia, lip ulceration, and hepatic infection, were mostly found to be 'possibly' related to lapatinib based on the case-by-case evaluation, warranting further clinical assessments. Initial or prolonged hospitalisation, death, and life-threatening events were the most common AEs outcomes reported, accounting for 28.79%, 13.79%, and 3.06%, respectively. Conclusion: This study provides valuable insights into lapatinib-induced toxicity in real-world settings.
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.