Evidence Hub

A real-world pharmacovigilance analysis of uveitis from systemic medications

Butt F, Mihalache A, Al-Burak SA, Huang RS, Popovic MM, Muni RH

Canadian journal of ophthalmology. Journal canadien d'ophtalmologie, 2026

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To identify U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved systemic drugs disproportionately associated with reported uveitis events using real-world pharmacovigilance data.

DESIGN: A retrospective pharmacovigilance study of a large spontaneous adverse event reporting database.

PARTICIPANTS: All uveitis cases reported to the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) between the fourth quarter of 2003 and the third quarter of 2024.

METHODS: FAERS data were analyzed using OpenVigil 2.1 data-mining software. Reports identifying FDA-approved drugs as primary suspects in uveitis cases were included. Disproportionality analyses were conducted by comparing drug-specific uveitis reports with the background reporting rate across all other drugs in the database. Reporting odds ratios (RORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Bayesian confidence propagation neural network algorithms were applied to reduce false-positive associations and strengthen signal detection.

RESULTS: A total of 7 301 uveitis events were identified. The strongest safety signals were observed for cidofovir (ROR = 103.8; 95% CI 53.0-203.2) and rifabutin (ROR = 77.4; 95% CI 50.5-118.7). Additional signals were detected for cobimetinib (ROR = 30.5), foscarnet (ROR = 29.0), infliximab (ROR = 18.1), dabrafenib (ROR = 16.4), vemurafenib (ROR = 16.2), trametinib (ROR = 15.5), brodalumab (ROR = 14.9), binimetinib (ROR = 11.3), encorafenib (ROR = 11.2), ipilimumab (ROR = 11.0), and…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free