4.5 Article

Pleural adverse drugs reactions and protein kinase inhibitors: Identification of suspicious targets by disproportionality analysis from VigiBase

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY
Volume 84, Issue 10, Pages 2373-2383

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/bcp.13693

Keywords

drug safety; pharmacodynamics; pharmacovigilance

Funding

  1. National Research Agency [Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR)] [ANR-11-PHUC-001]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

AimsTo evaluate the risk of pleural disorders (PD) associated with 33 protein kinase (PK) inhibitors (PKIs) through a disproportionality analysis and to identify which PKs and pathways are involved in PKI-induced PD. MethodsTo evaluate the risk of PD, reporting odds ratios (RORs) were calculated for 33 PKIs through data registered in the World Health Organization safety report database (VigiBase). We undertook a literature review to identify PKs that were possibly involved in PD caused by PKIs. Pearson correlation coefficients (r) between RORs and affinity data of 19 PKIs were calculated to identify the cellular target most likely to be involved in PKI-induced PD. ResultsA total of 235110 individual case safety reports were extracted from the database for 33 available PKIs. Among these reports, 5001 concerned PD (2.1%). Significant and positive disproportionality for PD was found for 29 of 33 PKI included in our study with top values for dasatinib [ROR=115.3; 95% confidence interval (CI): 110.1-120.8], bosutinib (ROR=20.4; 95% CI: 15.8-26.4) and ponatinib (ROR=12; 95% CI: 9.2-15.6). Correlation analyses between the product of dissociation constant and ROR highlighted possibly Lyn involvement in PD with PKI (r=0.73, P=0.0004). ConclusionsOur study showed that 28 of the 33 tested PKIs were associated with PD. Besides, the study highlighted the role of Lyn in PD caused by PKIs through an immune-mediated process.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available