ArticleJournal of pharmacy & pharmaceutical sciences : a publication of the Canadian Society for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Societe canadienne des sciences pharmaceutiques2025
Refined pharmacovigilance assessment of immune checkpoint inhibitors-related bullous pemphigoid: a multi-methodological approach utilizing FAERS database.
Article in Journal of pharmacy & pharmaceutical sciences : a publication of the Canadian Society for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Societe canadienne des sciences pharmaceutiques, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Efficacy and Safety of Dupilumab in Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Induced Bullous Pemphigoid: A Spanish Multicentric Case Series.Acta dermato-venereologica · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To evaluate the potential risk of bullous pemphigoid (BP) in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and to characterize ICI-related BP (irBP) using the United States Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database. Methods: The present study conducted a disproportionality analysis leveraging FAERS database, spanning the first quarter (Q1) of 2004-2025 Q1. To ensure robust signal detection, we employed a quadruple analytical approach incorporating: (1) reporting odds ratio (ROR), (2) proportional reporting ratio, (3) Bayesian confidence propagation neural network, and (4) multi-item gamma Poisson shrinker algorithms. These methodologies were systematically applied to assess the potential risk of BP in patients treated with ICIs. Furthermore, temporal characteristics of adverse event emergence were quantitatively assessed to delineate the time-to-onset patterns. Results: There are 850 irBP cases identified, comprising reports associated with the following agents: nivolumab (n = 530), pembrolizumab (n = 180), ipilimumab (n = 44), atezolizumab (n = 40), cemiplimab (n = 24), durvalumab (n = 19), tislelizumab (n = 10), and avelumab (n = 3). Affected patients were predominantly males (67.8%) and over 60 years of age (70.1%). All eight ICIs showed positive disproportionality signals, with ROR values ranked descendingly as: cemiplimab > nivolumab > tislelizumab > pembrolizumab > ipilimumab > durvalumab > atezolizumab > avelumab. The median time of irBP onset was 165.2 (IQR: 56-410) days. Conclusion: The study establishes a significant link between ICIs and BP. All ICIs increase BP risk. CTLA-4 inhibitors exhibited the most marked early risk concentration, highlighting the importance of early dermatologic evaluation after initiating CTLA-4 blockade.
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.