Pemigatinib-induced nail changes - A case report

Safety analysis of pemigatinib leveraging the US Food and Drug administration adverse event reporting system

Background: Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is a highly lethal and aggressive epithelial tumor of the hepatobiliary system. A poor prognosis, propensity for relapse, low chance of cure and survival are some of its hallmarks. Pemigatinib, the first targeted treatment for CCA in the United States, has been demonstrated to have a significant response rate and encouraging survival data in early-phase trials. The adverse events (AEs) of pemigatinib must also be determined. Objective: To understand more deeply the safety of pemigatinib in the real world through data-mining of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS). Methods: Disproportionality analysis was employed in a retrospective pharmacovigilance investigation to identify the AEs linked to pemigatinib use as signals. Data were collected between 1 January 2020 to 30 June 2022. Four data-mining methods (proportional reporting odds ratio; proportional reporting ratio; Bayesian confidence propagation neural networks of information components; empirical Bayes geometric means) were used to calculate disproportionality. Results: A total of 203 cases using pemigatinib as the prime-suspect medication were found in our search, which involved 99 preferred terms (PTs). Thirteen signals of pemigatinib-induced AEs in seven System Organ Classes were detected after confirming the four algorithms simultaneously. Nephrolithiasis was an unexpected significant AE not listed on the drug label found in our data-mining. Comparison of the differences between pemigatinib and platinum drugs in terms of 33 PTs revealed that 13 PTs also met the criteria of the four algorithms. Ten of these PTs were identical to those compared with all other drugs, in which (excluding a reduction in phosphorus in blood) other PT signal values were higher than those of all other drugs tested. However, comparison of the differences between pemigatinib and infigratinib in terms of the 33 PTs revealed no significant signals in each algorithm method. Conclusion: Some significant signals were detected between pemigatinib use and AEs. PTs with apparently strong signals and PTs not mentioned in the label should be taken seriously.