Cited by 6Pharmacovigilance and Adverse Drug ReactionsPharmaceutical industry and healthcareDrug-Induced Adverse Reactions

Adverse events associated with inclisiran: a real-world pharmacovigilance study of FDA adverse event reporting system (FAERS)

Open access
Li, Bing, Chen, Yan, Zhang, Yongyi, Qian, Mengying, Shan, Qing, Qian, Jiao, Guo, Jinmin·2026·Expert Opinion on Drug Safety

Abstract

Objective To gain an improved comprehension of inclisiran safety in real-world settings by data mining from FAERS. Methods Data were gathered between 1 December 2020 and 31 December 2023. The Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) corresponding preferred term (PT) and system organ class (SOC) were used to categorize adverse medication reactions in AE reports (AERs). By using reported odds ratio (ROR) method, positive signals were identified. Results There were 2,652 reports of inclisiran, and 150 of those AEs had significant disproportionality. Among the 44 PTs with moderate clinical priority, 35 PTs were discovered on the medicine label, including 12 IMEs and 2 DMEs. Of note, 9 PTs were unanticipated AEs that were not discovered in the medication label or reported clinical studies, such as movement disorder (ROR: 3.05; 95%CI: 1.73,5.37), aphonia (ROR: 3.77; 95%CI: 1.79,7.91), and pulmonary congestion (ROR: 3.47; 95%CI: 1.44,8.34). Inclisiran was found to be related to 12 serious AEs. The median TTO of 1896 cases was 13.5 (IQR 0-100) days. Conclusion We identified not only known AEs, but also new AE signals such as movement disorder. However, signals does not reveal actual risk, prospective clinical trials are still required to verify their causal connection.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/14740338.2025.2468855

Cites

50 of 50 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Li, B., Chen, Y., Zhang, Y., Qian, M., Shan, Q., Qian, J., & Guo, J.
Affiliations
  • Chinese People's Liberation Army (CN)
  • Jinan Key Laboratory of Individualised Clinical Drug Safety Monitoring and Pharmacovigilance Research, PLA 960th Hospital
  • Changhai Hospital (CN)
  • PLA 960th Hospital
Venue
Expert Opinion on Drug Safety
Published
2025-02-25
Volume
25
Issue
4
Pages
657-668
ISSN
  • 1474-0338 (ISSN-L)
  • 1744-764X
OpenAlex
W4407828355
Cited by
6
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 6
FWCI
3.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Expert Opinion on Drug Safety (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Taishan Scholars (tsqn202312385)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Toxicology › Pharmacovigilance and Adverse Drug Reactions
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Drug-Induced Adverse Reactions
Keywords
adverse drug reactions, pharmacovigilance, FDA Adverse Event Reporting System, disproportionality analysis, safety signals, pancreatitis, deafness, myocardial infarction, cardiac arrhythmias, movement disorders, aphonia, pulmonary congestion, PCSK9 inhibitors, real-world safety, drug labeling, signal prioritization, underreporting
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, United States, United States Food and Drug Administration, Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems, Young Adult, Data Mining, Pharmacovigilance, Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review