Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Safety evaluation of ceftazidime/avibactam based on FAERS database
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Safety evaluation of ceftazidime/avibactam based on FAERS database
Do you wish to request the book?
Safety evaluation of ceftazidime/avibactam based on FAERS database
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Safety evaluation of ceftazidime/avibactam based on FAERS database
2024
Overview
To explore adverse event (AE) signals of Ceftazidime/avibactam (CZA) based on the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database.
AE reports primarily associated with CZA were retrieved from the FAERS database from the second quarter of 2015 to the second quarter of 2023. Signal detection was conducted using the reporting odds ratio (ROR), proportional reporting ratio (PRR), Bayesian Confidence Propagation Neural Network (BCPNN), and Multi-item Gamma Poisson Shrinker (MGPS) methods.
A total of 750 AEs reports with CZA as the preferred suspected drug were obtained, identifying 66 preferred terms (PTs) involving 24 system organ classes (SOCs). Besides, the AEs already mentioned in the drug label, this study also revealed some new, clinically valuable potential AEsignals, such as Cholestasis (n = 14, ROR 29.39, PRR 29.15, IC 3.34, EBGM 29.11), Drug-induced liver injury (n = 8, ROR 9.05, PRR 9.01, IC 2.25, EBGM 9.01), Hepatocellular injury (n = 7, ROR 13.90, PRR 13.84, IC 2.41, EBGM 13.63), Haemolytic anaemia (n = 5, ROR 24.29, PRR 24.22, IC 2.42, EBGM 40.53), etc. Additionally, AE signals with higher intensity were identified, such as Hypernatraemia (n = 5, ROR 40.73, PRR 40.61, IC 2.31, EBGM 24.19), Toxic epidermal necrolysis (n = 4, ROR 11.58, PRR 11.55, IC 1.89, EBGM 11.54). Therefore, special vigilance for these potential AEs is warranted when using CZA clinically.
This study highlights the potential AEs and risks associated with the clinical use of CZA, particularly the risks related to Cholestasis, Drug-induced liver injury, Haemolytic anaemia, Hypernatraemia, and Toxic epidermal necrolysis.
Publisher
Springer Nature B.V
