Safety evaluation of selective estrogen receptor degraders (SERDs) using real-world evidence from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS)

This study aims to evaluate post-marketing adverse event data for two selective estrogen receptor degraders (SERDs) in a real-world context, identify potential risk signals, and offer insights for clinical pharmacovigilance. Data were extracted from the U.S. FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database, covering the period from Q1 2004 to Q4 2024. The analysis commenced with elacestrant (2022) and fulvestrant (2004), concluding in the fourth quarter of 2024. Data standardization was achieved using MedDRA version 27.0. Signal detection employed four methodologies: Reporting Odds Ratio (ROR), Proportional Reporting Ratio (PRR), Bayesian Confidence Propagation Neural Network (BCPNN), and Multi-item Gamma Poisson Shrinker (MGPS). A total of 6,636 adverse event (AE) reports identified elacestrant as the primary suspected drug, while 9,120 reports identified fulvestrant as the primary suspected drug. Both drugs commonly induced adverse reactions such as nausea, vomiting, disease progression, elevated liver enzymes, and hot flashes. Elacestrant was frequently associated with abnormal tumor markers and esophageal-related reactions. In contrast, fulvestrant was linked to a higher incidence of tumor metastasis and may also affect the hematological and lymphatic systems, as well as the cardiovascular and respiratory systems. Both classes of SERDs demonstrated a generally favorable overall safety profile, although differences were noted in their specific adverse reaction profiles. For elacestrant, particular attention should be given to dehydration, abnormal tumor markers, and esophageal-related reactions. For fulvestrant, increased vigilance is necessary regarding cancer metastasis and adverse events impacting the hematological and lymphatic systems. It is recommended that targeted monitoring be enhanced in clinical practice in accordance with the distinct characteristics of each drug.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scientific Reports
Published
2025-11-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-26351-z
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Pharmacovigilance and Adverse Drug Reactions
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.31
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Safety evaluation of selective estrogen receptor degraders (SERDs) using real-world evidence from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS)

Dang Da-sheng, Yuan Yuan, Kang Ye, Xue Sun
1 citations
Scientific Reports
Pharmacovigilance and Adverse Drug Reactions
1.31
article

Safety evaluation of selective estrogen receptor degraders (SERDs) using real-world evidence from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS)

Dang Da-sheng, Yuan Yuan, Kang Ye, Xue Sun
article en
1 citations

Abstract

This study aims to evaluate post-marketing adverse event data for two selective estrogen receptor degraders (SERDs) in a real-world context, identify potential risk signals, and offer insights for clinical pharmacovigilance. Data were extracted from the U.S. FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database, covering the period from Q1 2004 to Q4 2024. The analysis commenced with elacestrant (2022) and fulvestrant (2004), concluding in the fourth quarter of 2024. Data standardization was achieved using MedDRA version 27.0. Signal detection employed four methodologies: Reporting Odds Ratio (ROR), Proportional Reporting Ratio (PRR), Bayesian Confidence Propagation Neural Network (BCPNN), and Multi-item Gamma Poisson Shrinker (MGPS). A total of 6,636 adverse event (AE) reports identified elacestrant as the primary suspected drug, while 9,120 reports identified fulvestrant as the primary suspected drug. Both drugs commonly induced adverse reactions such as nausea, vomiting, disease progression, elevated liver enzymes, and hot flashes. Elacestrant was frequently associated with abnormal tumor markers and esophageal-related reactions. In contrast, fulvestrant was linked to a higher incidence of tumor metastasis and may also affect the hematological and lymphatic systems, as well as the cardiovascular and respiratory systems. Both classes of SERDs demonstrated a generally favorable overall safety profile, although differences were noted in their specific adverse reaction profiles. For elacestrant, particular attention should be given to dehydration, abnormal tumor markers, and esophageal-related reactions. For fulvestrant, increased vigilance is necessary regarding cancer metastasis and adverse events impacting the hematological and lymphatic systems. It is recommended that targeted monitoring be enhanced in clinical practice in accordance with the distinct characteristics of each drug.

Scientific ReportsVol. 15(1)
General Hospital of Shenyang Military Region (CN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 17%
Pharmacovigilance and Adverse Drug Reactions
1.31
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.