ArticleMedicine2026
Pharmacovigilance analysis of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors: A FAERS-based signal detection study.
Article in Medicine, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study compares the safety signals of 3 glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPIs) - tirofiban, abciximab, and eptifibatide - using the US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System, aiming to guide clinical application. We extracted reports listing the 3 GPIs as the primary suspect from the US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System database. Adverse events were systematically coded using preferred terms and subsequently mapped to system organ classes. To identify potential safety signals, we employed disproportionality analysis algorithms, including the proportional reporting ratio and reporting odds ratio, with predefined thresholds for signal detection. A total of 4911 reports were analyzed (tirofiban: 2352; abciximab: 1295; and eptifibatide: 1264). At the system organ classes level, all 3 GPIs showed positive signals for cardiac disorders, vascular disorders, blood and lymphatic system disorders, and respiratory, thoracic, and mediastinal disorders. Tirofiban demonstrated the strongest cardiovascular signals, followed by abciximab, whereas eptifibatide showed distinct signals in investigations (e.g., laboratory abnormalities) and gastrointestinal disorders. Tirofiban and abciximab also exhibited signals in various nervous system disorders. At the preferred terms level, thrombocytopenia and multi-site hemorrhage were common to all 3 GPIs, consistent with product labeling information. Distinctive signals emerged: tirofiban signals highlighted intracranial hemorrhage and vascular access site bleeding, plus restenosis and reocclusion. Abciximab showed the broadest mucosal bleeding profile (oral, nasal, pharyngeal, otic, conjunctival, and urinary tract) and Mallory-Weiss syndrome. Eptifibatide signals included retroperitoneal hemorrhage, mediastinal hematoma, and bleeding at tracheal, spinal, pelvic, and joint sites, with notable signals for hemorrhagic pancreatitis and anaphylaxis. All 3 GPIs are strongly associated with hemorrhage and thrombocytopenia but differ in risk patterns. Tirofiban signals emphasize cerebrocardiovascular bleeding risks (intracranial and vascular access sites). Eptifibatide signals indicate broader systemic involvement. Abciximab signals highlight oropharyngeal, otorhinolaryngologic, and urinary tract mucosal surfaces. These findings support pharmacovigilance and warrant validation through prospective studies, with the understanding that all reported associations are based on statistical signals from a spontaneous reporting system and do not establish causality.
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.