乌司奴单抗与乌帕替尼治疗炎症性肠病的药物不良事件分析: 基于FAERS数据库的药物警戒信号挖掘

Pharmacovigilance Signal Mining and Analysis of Ustekinumab versus Upadacitinib for Inflammatory Bowel Disease Based on the FAERS Database

  • 摘要:
    目的 基于国际权威数据库, 分析乌司奴单抗和乌帕替尼治疗炎症性肠病(inflammatory bowel disease, IBD)的潜在药物不良事件(adverse drug events, ADE), 从而为临床用药提供依据。
    方法 检索美国食品药品监督管理局的不良事件报告系统(Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System, FAERS)数据库, 通过Open Vigil 2.1分别获取2017年第三季度至2025年第一季度, 适应证为IBD且乌司奴单抗为首要怀疑药物, 以及2019年第三季度至2025年第一季度, 适应证为IBD且乌帕替尼为首要怀疑药物的ADE报告。采用报告比值比(reporting odds ratio, ROR)和比例报告比(proportional reporting ratio, PRR)法进行信号挖掘与统计分析。
    结果 经检索, 获得以乌司奴单抗和乌帕替尼为首要怀疑药物治疗IBD的ADE报告分别3648份和3812份。采用ROR-PRR联合检测法筛选出相应的ADE信号, 发现乌司奴单抗相关高频ADE主要包括过敏反应、各类感染、脑雾等, 乌帕替尼相关高频ADE主要包括痤疮、胀气、带状疱疹等。对阳性信号进行系统器官分类, 两种药物均以感染及侵染性疾病, 消化系统疾病, 神经系统疾病, 皮肤和皮下组织疾病, 呼吸、胸和纵隔疾病为高发类别, 其中感染及侵染类疾病为最主要的系统器官分类, 涉及的首选术语包括埃希菌性脓毒症、肺炎球菌性肺炎等。
    结论 乌司奴单抗与乌帕替尼在治疗IBD时具有不同的安全性特征。除说明书已明确的ADE外, 乌司奴单抗还需密切关注其过敏反应、机会性感染及神经系统潜在风险; 而乌帕替尼则需警惕其引发痤疮、带状疱疹、高胆固醇血症及血栓事件的风险。这些发现为IBD临床个体化用药决策提供了重要的警戒信息。

     

    Abstract:
    Objective To analyze potential adverse drug events(ADEs) associated with ustekinumab and upadacitinib in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease(IBD) based on an international authoritative database, thereby providing evidence for clinical medication safety.
    Methods Data were extracted from the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System(FAERS) database using OpenVigil 2.1. ADE reports were collected for ustekinumab(from Q3 2017 to Q1 2025) and upadacitinib(from Q3 2019 to Q1 2025), where each drug was identified as the primary suspected medication for IBD. Signal detection and statistical analysis were performed using the reporting odds ratio(ROR) and proportional reporting ratio(PRR) methods.
    Results A total of 3648 ADE reports for ustekinumab and 3812 for upadacitinib, with each as the primary suspected drug in IBD treatment, were retrieved. Using the ROR-PRR combined detection method, relevant ADE signals were identified. High-frequency ADEs associated with ustekinumab included hypersensitivity reactions, various infections, and brain fog, while those associated with upadacitinib included acne, flatulence, and herpes zoster. System organ class(SOC) analysis of positive signals indicated that both drugs commonly caused ADEs in categories such as Infections and infestations, Gastrointestinal disorders, Nervous system disorders, Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders, and Respiratory, thoracic, and mediastinal disorders. Among these, Infections and infestations were the most frequent SOC, involving preferred terms such as Escherichia sepsis and Pneumococcal pneumonia.
    Conclusions Ustekinumab and upadacitinib exhibit distinct safety profiles in the treatment of IBD. In addition to known ADEs described in the prescribing information, ustekinumab requires close monitoring for hypersensitivity reactions, opportunistic infections, and potential neurological risks. For upadacitinib, attention should be paid to risks of acne, herpes zoster, hypercholesterolemia, and thrombotic events. These findings provide important safety information to support individualized clinical decision-making in IBD management.

     

/

返回文章
返回