Potential adverse events associated with sphingosine-1-phosphate (S1P) receptor modulators in patients with multiple sclerosis: an analysis of the FDA adverse event reporting system (FAERS) database

Objective Sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor (S1PR) modulators have recently attracted increasing attention for the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS). Despite their preference in the clinic, multiple adverse events (AEs) continue to be reported every year. This study aimed to investigate the potential AEs as well as related important medical events (IMEs) signal associated with S1PR modulators, including fingolimod, siponimod and ozanimod in a real-world study using the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database. Methods All data were collected from the FAERS database, spanning from the fourth quarter of 2010(2010Q4) to the second quarter of 2023 (2023Q2). Potential AE and IME signals of S1PR modulators were identified based on a disproportionality analysis using the reporting odds ratio (ROR), proportional reporting ratio (PRR), and the bayesian confidence propagation neural network of information components (IC). Results Overall, 276,436 reports of fingolimod, 20,972 reports of siponimod and 10,742 reports of ozanimod were analyzed from the FAERS database. Among reports, females were more prone to develop AEs (73.71% for females vs. 23.21% for males), and more than 50% of patients suffered from AEs were between 18 and 64 years. Subsequently, we investigated the top 20 AEs associated with the signal strength of S1PR modulators at the preferred term (PT) level, and identified 31 (8 vs. 11 vs. 12, respectively) unlabeled risk signals such as thrombosis, uterine disorder and reproductive system and breast disorders. Furthermore, we discovered that the S1PR modulator reported variations in the possible IMEs, and that the IMEs associated with ocular events were reported frequently. It's interesting to note that infection and malignancy are prominent signals with both fingolimod and siponimod in the top 20 PTs related to mortality reports. Conclusion The present investigation highlights the possible safety risks associated with S1PR modulators. The majority of AEs are generally consistent with previous studies and are mentioned in the prescribing instructions, however, several unexpected AE signals have also been observed. Ozanimod showed the lowest signal intensity and a better safety profile than the other S1PR modulators. Due to the short marketing time of drugs and the limitations of spontaneous reporting database, further research is required to identify potential AEs related to S1PR modulators.