4.6 Article

Cardiovascular Toxicity of Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors Used in Chronic Myeloid Leukemia: An Analysis of the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System Database (FAERS)

Journal

CANCERS
Volume 12, Issue 4, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/cancers12040826

Keywords

tyrosine kinase inhibitors; cardiovascular toxicity; chronic myeloid leukemia; FAERS; adverse drug reaction

Categories

Funding

  1. Italian Society of Toxicology (SITOX)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), the treatment of choice for chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), can be associated to cardiovascular (CV) adverse events (AEs). A case/non-case study was performed using AE reports registered in the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database to compare the risk of CV event reports related to TKIs indicated in the management of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). Disproportionality of CV event-related TKIs was computed using the Reporting Odds Ratio (ROR) as a measure of potential risk increase. Nilotinib accounts for more than half of reported cases related to TKIs. Signal of Disproportionate Reporting (SDR) was found for cardiac failure, ischemic heart disease, cardiac arrhythmias, torsade de pointes/QT prolongation, hypertension, and pulmonary hypertension. Dasatinib and bosutinib were related to the highest disproportionality for cardiac failure. Nilotinib was associated with the highest SDR for ischemic heart disease, torsade de pointes/QT prolongation and cardiac arrhythmias. Only ponatinib was related to an SDR for hypertension, while dasatinib and imatinib were related to pulmonary hypertension. In the context of CML, TKIs have different safety profiles related to CV events, among which nilotinib seems particularly related to. These results claim for a revision of its CV safety profile mainly for the risk of torsade de pointes/QT prolongation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available