ArticlePloS one2026
Long-term safety evaluation of mirtazapine: A real-world pharmacovigilance study based on the FAERS database.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMirtazapine is widely used in the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD), yet its real-world safety profile remains insufficiently evaluated.
methodsThis study analyzed adverse event (AE, plural AEs) reports related to mirtazapine from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database between the first quarter of 2004 and the first quarter of 2025. Four disproportionality analysis methods were employed, including reporting odds ratio (ROR), proportional reporting ratio (PRR), Bayesian confidence propagation neural network (BCPNN), and multi-item gamma Poisson shrinker (MGPS). Additional analyses included sensitivity analysis, time-to-onset (TTO) evaluation, and Weibull distribution modeling.
resultsA total of 17,953 reports were included, with females accounting for 54.1% and males for 37.7%. In 48.4% of the reports, patients were aged between 18 and 65 years. Overall, 65.0% of the reports were submitted by healthcare professionals. Known AEs such as somnolence (n = 887, ROR = 4.57, PRR = 4.52, EBGM = 4.50, IC = 2.17), QT interval prolongation (n = 259, ROR = 7.35, PRR = 7.32, EBGM = 7.27, IC = 2.86), suicidal ideation (n = 601, ROR = 6.65, PRR = 6.59, EBGM = 6.55, IC = 2.71), and rhabdomyolysis (n = 146, ROR = 3.66, PRR = 3.65, EBGM = 3.64, IC = 1.87) showed positive signals. In addition, several unexpected AEs also exhibited positive signals, including restless legs syndrome (n = 305, ROR = 17.05, PRR = 16.97, EBGM = 16.65, IC = 4.06), neuroleptic malignant syndrome (n = 158, ROR = 13.77, PRR = 13.74, EBGM = 13.53, IC = 3.76), and nightmare (n = 279, ROR = 8.02, PRR = 7.99, EBGM = 7.93, IC = 2.99). TTO analysis showed that 59.52% of AEs occurred within the first month of treatment. The results of the sensitivity analyses further supported the robustness of these findings.
conclusionThis study systematically assessed the long-term safety profile of mirtazapine using 21 years of real-world pharmacovigilance data from the FAERS database. The findings provide important evidence to support safe clinical use of mirtazapine and emphasize the need for continuous safety monitoring.
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.