← All causality assessments
Causality assessment · Causality: well established

Rituximab and Serious infection: is the FAERS signal real?

n=11,043 co-reports · PRR 8.2 · ROR 8.6
A written Bradford Hill assessment of one drug–event pair. The grade is a judgement about the signal, not a statement that this drug causes this event in any one person; FAERS counts are reports, not rates.
Causality: well established

Rituximab ↔ Serious infection

n=11,043 co-reports · PRR 8.2 · ROR 8.6

Reporting over time (stimulated-reporting check)

2004: 12 reports (2.36% of the drug's reports)2005: 19 reports (2.57% of the drug's reports)2006: 21 reports (2.90% of the drug's reports)2007: 29 reports (2.31% of the drug's reports)2008: 42 reports (2.96% of the drug's reports)2009: 75 reports (3.68% of the drug's reports)2010: 81 reports (3.26% of the drug's reports)2011: 120 reports (3.76% of the drug's reports)2012: 155 reports (3.30% of the drug's reports)2013: 169 reports (3.52% of the drug's reports)2014: 124 reports (2.47% of the drug's reports)2015: 195 reports (3.28% of the drug's reports)2016: 204 reports (3.01% of the drug's reports)2017: 284 reports (2.53% of the drug's reports)2018: 326 reports (2.65% of the drug's reports)2019: 357 reports (2.38% of the drug's reports)2020: 502 reports (2.44% of the drug's reports)2021: 403 reports (2.17% of the drug's reports)2022: 396 reports (1.86% of the drug's reports)2023: 486 reports (2.40% of the drug's reports)2024: 420 reports (1.74% of the drug's reports)2025: 395 reports (2.09% of the drug's reports)05081114172023

No reporting spike: the pair's share of the drug's reports is fairly stable over time (busiest two years hold 19% of 4,815 reports), so stimulated reporting is unlikely to explain the signal.

Bars: reports per year as a share of all FAERS reports for this drug, 2004–2025; amber = spike year (>3× the median share, ≥50 reports). Source: openFDA count=receivedate, retrieved 2026-10-09.

Rituximab is an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody that depletes B cells, and an increased risk of infection — including serious bacterial, fungal, and viral infections, and notably reactivation of hepatitis B and progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML) — is a labeled, mechanistic consequence of that depletion. The FDA label carries boxed warnings for PML and HBV reactivation. The population treated (lymphoma, autoimmune disease, transplant) also raises baseline infection risk, so the FAERS count mixes drug-driven and disease-driven infection, but the causal contribution of B-cell depletion itself is well established.

Regulatory basis: rituximab prescribing information (boxed warnings for progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy and hepatitis B virus reactivation; increased risk of serious infections).

Bradford Hill viewpointStatusNote
Temporality (necessary)metInfections and reactivation follow B-cell depletion after dosing
StrengthpartialPRR 8 — modest, because infection is common in this population generally
ConsistencymetConsistent across indications and trials
Specificitynot establishedInfection is nonspecific; disease and concomitant therapy also contribute
Biological gradientpartialRelates to degree/duration of B-cell depletion and repeat dosing
PlausibilitymetB-cell depletion impairs humoral immunity — named mechanism
CoherencemetCoheres with the immunosuppression seen with other B-cell-depleting agents
ExperimentpartialInfection risk tracks with depletion depth; no clean randomized removal test
AnalogymetShared with other immunosuppressants/anti-CD20 therapies

This page's own qualitative read, not an automated/citation-gated assessment.

✓ Trial evidence found — safety of rituximab in rheumatoid arthritis (NCT00443651)

Term (as recorded)Rituximab 1000 mg (n=401)Rituximab 500 mg (n=176)
Pneumonia (serious)41
Upper respiratory tract infection (other)5127
Urinary tract infection (other)4515

The recorded infection burden is clear, but both arms received rituximab (different doses), with no placebo arm — so this shows that infections are captured clinically, not a comparator-adjusted risk. View on ClinicalTrials.gov →