ArticleHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2026
Pharmacovigilance signals of dupilumab among pediatric patients: A real‑world analysis based on the FAERS database.
Article in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dupilumab is effective for the treatment of moderate‑to‑severe type 2 inflammatory diseases; however, its real‑world safety profile in pediatric patients remains to be further clarified. This retrospective pharmacovigilance study analyzed U.S. Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) data from 2017 to 2025, including 44,593 reports where dupilumab was the primary suspect drug in children. Disproportionality analyses (ROR, PRR, BCPNN, MGPS), time-to-onset analysis, stratified analysis, and Weibull modeling assessed adverse event (AE) distribution and patterns. Results showed balanced sex distribution (male 50.1%, female 48.6%), with adolescents (12-17y) most common (45.3%), and report counts increasing over time. 93 positive safety signals were detected. The most common core AEs were rash (4,105 cases; ROR = 4.55, 95% CI: 4.38-4.72), injection site pain (3,582 cases; ROR = 8.59, 95% CI: 8.22-8.97), and skin exfoliation (1,834 cases; ROR = 3.41, 95% CI: 3.23-3.59). Potential unlisted signals included vitiligo (33 cases; ROR = 10.46, 95% CI: 6.52-16.78), skin depigmentation (32 cases; ROR = 13.04, 95% CI: 7.85-21.66), and eye color change (13 cases; ROR = 7.06, 95% CI: 3.54-14.11). Stratified analyses indicated distinct patterns of adverse‑event reporting across age and sex strata. Among cases with complete temporal information, most AEs occurred within 30d after dupilumab initiation, with a median time‑to‑onset of 14d. In conclusion, this large-scale spontaneous-reporting study detected potential safety signals in children. Given FAERS data limitations, the associations should be viewed as hypothesis-generating rather than confirmatory, and may inform future signal validation and prospective studies.
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.