Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are widely used in gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs). The aim of this study is to evaluate the reporting frequency of neuropsychiatric adverse drug reactions (ADRs) for TKIs through the analysis of European individual case safety reports (ICSRs). All ICSRs collected in EudraVigilance up to 31 December 2021 with one TKI having GISTs as an indication (imatinib (IM), sunitinib (SU), avapritinib (AVA), regorafenib (REG), and ripretinib (RIP)) were included. A disproportionality analysis was performed to assess the frequency of reporting for each TKI compared to all other TKIs. The number of analyzed ICSRs was 8512, of which 57.9% were related to IM. Neuropsychiatric ADRs were reported at least once in 1511 ICSRs (17.8%). A higher reporting probability of neuropsychiatric ADRs was shown for AVA. Most neuropsychiatric ADRs were known, except for a higher frequency of lumbar spinal cord and nerve root disorders (reporting odds ratio, ROR 4.46; confidence interval, CI 95% 1.58–12.54), olfactory nerve disorders (8.02; 2.44–26.33), and hallucinations (22.96; 8.45–62.36) for AVA. The analyses of European ICSRs largely confirmed the safety profiles of TKIs in GISTs, but some ADRs are worthy of discussion. Further studies are needed to increase the knowledge of the neuropsychiatric disorders of newly approved TKIs.

Daridorexant (dari), as the first dual orexin receptor antagonist (DORA) marketed in Europe, offers a novel therapeutic approach to insomnia. However, data regarding its real-world safety are scarce. Thus, this study was aimed at assessing its safety profile using a large-scale pharmacovigilance database. Dari-related adverse drug reaction (ADR) reports from the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System were scrutinized, and ADRs were selected using reporting odds ratio (ROR) as a measure of disproportionality. Frequencies of events related to dari were compared to all other drugs (reference group, RG1) and only to other DORAs (RG2). Only significant disproportionalities to both RGs were evaluated in-depth. A total of 845 dari-related reports were selected; nightmares (n = 146; dari vs. RG1: ROR = 113.74; 95%CI [95.13, 136]; dari vs. RG2: ROR = 2.35; 95 CI% [1.93, 2.85]), depression (n = 22; dari vs. RG1: 2.13; [1.39, 3.25]; dari vs. RG2: ROR = 2.31; 95 CI% [1.45, 3.67]), and hangover (n = 20; dari vs. RG1: ROR = 127.92; 95 CI% [81.98, 199.62]; and dari vs. RG2: 3.38; [2.04, 5.61]) were considered as safety signals. These data provide valuable insights into the real-world safety profile of daridorexant, supporting the existence of safety signals related to nightmares, depression, and hangovers.

Background: this study assessed the nephrotoxicity of regorafenib (REG) and encorafenib (ENC) in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) through an analysis of reports from the US Food and Drug Administration’s Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database. Methods: descriptive and disproportional analyses were performed for all reports using ENC and REG as the primary suspect. Results: A total of 379 reports had at least one renal adverse drug reaction (ADR), and these ADRs were mainly related to REG (93.1%). Potential safety signals for REG included chromaturia (n = 44; ROR = 12.00, CI 95% = 8.92–16.16; IC = 2.36, IC₀₂₅–IC₀₇₅ = 2.06–2.66), hydronephrosis (10; 8.70, 4.67–16.19; 1.85, 1.23–2.47), nephrotic syndrome (7; 5.73, 2.73–12.03; 1.47, 0.73–2.21), renal impairment (53; 4.16, 3.17–5.45; 1.39, 1.12–1.66), dysuria (19; 3.06, 1.95–4.81; 1.06, 0.61–1.52), renal failure (38; 1.66, 1.20–2.28; 0.49, 0.17–0.81), and acute kidney injury (AKI) (43; 1.46, 1.08–1.97; 0.37, 0.07–0.67). For ENC, consistent disproportionalities were observed for AKI (n = 11; ROR = 3.79, CI 95% = 2.09–6.90; IC = 1.32, IC₀₂₅–IC₀₇₅ = 0.72–1.91) and dysuria (4; 6.50, 2.43–17.39; 1.86, 0.88–2.85). Conclusions: these findings highlight some not extensively reported renal ADRs that require further investigations to better characterize the safety profiles of REG and ENC in patients with mCRC.

Introduction: The combination of BRAF and MEK inhibitors (BRAF/MEKi) has significantly improved survival in melanoma patients with BRAF V600 mutations. However, these agents can cause cardiovascular (CV) toxicity, compromising efficacy. This study evaluated the CV adverse events (cAEs) associated with BRAF/MEKi using the U.S. FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) to identify new signals of disproportionate reporting (SDRs). Methods: Descriptive and disproportionality analyses were conducted on reports listing dabrafenib (D), vemurafenib (V), encorafenib (E), trametinib (T), cobimetinib (C), or binimetinib (B) as suspects in monotherapy or combination therapy (D + T, V + C, E + B), with melanoma as the indication and at least one cAE. Standardized MedDRA Queries (SMQs) related to cAEs, including bradyarrhythmias and tachyarrhythmias, cardiac failure, cardiomyopathy, thrombotic events, ischaemic heart disease, and myocarditis/pericarditis, were analyzed. Results: Of the 14,077,067 reports retrieved, 18,370 (0.1%) were linked to BRAF/MEKi, with 1591 (8.7%) reporting cAEs, primarily in combination therapy (n = 1268). Disproportionality analysis identified 64 clinically relevant SDRs, most of which were unexpected. Notable findings included bradyarrhythmias, such as QT prolongation with D + T (n = 59; Reporting Odds Ratio, ROR = 5.09, 95% Confidence Interval, CI = 3.94–6.58), cardiac failure with V + C (29; 3.76, 2.6–5.42), and tachyarrhythmias, particularly atrial fibrillation with D + T (99; 2.37, 1.94–2.89). Among embolic and thrombotic events, clinically significant SDRs were observed for disseminated intravascular coagulation with D + T (38; 10.22, 7.42–14.06) and pulmonary embolism with V + C (22; 2.79, 1.83–4.24). Conclusions: Our findings underscore the need for comprehensive CV monitoring in patients receiving BRAF/MEKi therapy to prevent or detect cAEs early and reduce treatment-related risks, particularly in high-risk populations.

Background/Objectives: Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have revolutionized multiple myeloma (MM) treatment. However, post-marketing data on their neuropsychiatric safety are limited. This study aimed to evaluate neuropsychiatric adverse events (AEs) related to mAbs used for MM through a retrospective pharmacovigilance analysis using the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adverse Events Reporting System (FAERS) database. Methods: Individual case safety reports (ICSRs) from 2015 to 2023 with at least one neuropsychiatric AE and one of the MM-approved mAbs as the suspected drug (i.e., daratumumab, elotuzumab, isatuximab, belantamab mafodotin, teclistamab, elranatamab, and talquentamab) were analyzed using descriptive and disproportionality approaches. Results: Unknown signals of disproportionate reporting (SDR) included the following: cerebral infarction for daratumumab (n = 45; reporting odds ratio (ROR) = 2.39, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.79–3.21; information component (IC) = 1.54, IC₀₂₅–IC₀₇₅ = 1.05–1.9), elotuzumab (25; 7.61, 5.13–11.28; 3.03, 2.37–3.51), and isatuximab (10; 2.56, 1.38–4.76; 1.67, 0.59–2.4); mental status changes for daratumumab (40; 2.66, 1.95–3.63; 1.67, 1.14–2.04) and belantamab mafodotin (10; 4.23, 2.28–7.88; 2.3, 1.22–3.03); an altered state of consciousness for daratumumab (32; 1.97, 1.39–2.78; 1.32, 0.73–1.74) and belantamab mafodotin (6; 2.35, 1.05–5.23; 1.6, 0.19–2.52); Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS) for daratumumab (23; 6.42, 4.26–9.69; 2.81, 2.11–3.3), isatuximab (8; 10.72, 5.35–21.48; 3.57, 2.35–4.37), and elotuzumab (3; 4.74, 1.53–14.7; 2.59, 0.52–3.8); and orthostatic intolerance for daratumumab (10; 12.54, 6.71–23.43; 3.75, 2.67–4.48) and elotuzumab (4; 28.31, 10.58–75.73; 5, 3.24–6.08). Conclusions: Our analysis highlighted several previously unacknowledged SDRs for MM-approved mAbs. Given the complex and not entirely understood etiology of some neuropsychiatric AEs, including GBS, further investigations are necessary.