30 Different Drugs Linked to Retinal Detachment

Limited clinical evidence currently exists for the relationship that various pharmaceutical agents have with the possibility of retinal detachment (RD). One new study published in Eye used the FDA’s Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) to capitalize on real-world data in relation to any drugs associated with RD. This figure from the study presents a grouped bubble chart illustrating positive drug signals for RD. Different colors represent distinct drug categories, while the size of each bubble corresponds to the number of adverse event reports associated with each drug linked to RD. Photo: Chen XD, et al. Eye (Lond). October 10, 2025. Click image to enlarge. Over 17 million FAERS reports underwent a disproportionality analysis and drugs with statistically significant RD reporting were categorized by therapeutic class, signal strength, latency period and subgroup factors like off-label use, sex, subtypes and regions. It was found that 30 total agents—including ophthalmic, anticancer therapies, corticosteroids and erectile dysfunction medications—had significant association with RD. Highest signal strength was observed with pilocarpine, encorafenib and ocriplasmin, while prednisolone, bevacizumab and topiramate had lower strengths. Latency period also varied, with erectile dysfunction with the longest median latency of 365 days; anticancer drugs conversely had the shortest latency with 14 days. Subgroup analysis revealed elevated RD signal strength with off-label use as well as distinct susceptibility patterns by age. Adults younger than 65 and men had higher signal strength for specific drug classes like ophthalmic agents, and adults over 65 were more susceptible to RD with corticosteroids.The authors of the study elaborate on their findings, emphasizing that it is of particular concern that multi-target antineoplastic agents like encorafenib often had a short latency before RD onset—emphasizing the need for close monitoring of ophthalmic symptoms and regular retinal assessments during treatment. Erectile dysfunction drugs, conversely, are often phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors and had lower signal strength ranking with longer latency period before manifested ocular events. As the authors explain, various studies suggest these agents may cause transient, reversible visual side effects, but when used with medical supervision, is not likely to cause retinal toxicity. Subsequently, this toxicity is mostly mild and may only require monitoring during long-term use.Interestingly, different drug classes also displayed distinct associations with specific RD subtypes. Drugs binimetinib, cobimetinib, encorafenib and erdafitinib had more cases of exudative detachment, while aflibercept had most cases consist of regmatogenous detachments; bevacizumab and ranibizumab had elevated cases of tractional detachments, with bevacizumab having the most cases.  Younger patients had higher signal strength with anti-VEGF agents and certain corticosteroids, but for older patients, this included antibiotics and immunomodulators. By sex, women had higher RD reports with cefuroxime and encorafenib, and men with aflibercept and cobimetinib. The investigators believe that based on these groupings, “age, gender and other patient characteristics could be considered in future risk stratification efforts to better understand and potentially mitigate RD risk in susceptible populations.”More generally, the researchers posit that “the large-sample evidence from this study further underscores the importance of intensified ophthalmic follow-up for patients prescribed these high-signal strength drugs, in addition to advising them to promptly recognize and report potential RD warning signs such as blurred vision, visual field loss, photopsia or floaters.”Click here for the journal source. Chen XD, Xiao KH, Wu SN, et al. Drug-related retinal detachment pharmacovigilance signals in the real world: evidence from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System. Eye (Lond). October 10, 2025. [Epub ahead of print]. This article was developed by the editorial staff in conjunction with experts in the field. In the process, AI may have been among the editorial tools used to meet the goals of human editors, who approved all content.