ReviewNature reviews. Drug discovery2009
Lessons from 60 years of pharmaceutical innovation.
Review in Nature reviews. Drug discovery, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 285 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
285 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Drug pricing models, no 'one-size-fits-all' approach: a systematic review and critical evaluation of pricing models in an evolving pharmaceutical landscape.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2025Pooled it
- Framework to identify innovative sources of value creation from platform technologies.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Pooled it
- Multiple modes of data sharing can facilitate secondary use of sensitive health data for research.BMJ global health · 2023Pooled it
- A systematic review and critical assessment of incentive strategies for discovery and development of novel antibiotics.The Journal of antibiotics · 2016Pooled it
- Intra-Target Microdosing - A Novel Drug Development Approach: Proof of Concept, Safety, and Feasibility Study in Humans.Clinical and translational science · 2017Trial
- Impact of drug repurposing between 1985 and 2024 on pharmaceutical innovation.Communications medicine · 2026Article
- Need for NAMs: A systematic evidence synthesis revealing over half a century of drug development failure.NAM journal · 2026Article
- New insights into translational research in Alzheimer's disease guided by artificial intelligence, computational and systems biology.Acta pharmaceutica Sinica. B · 2025Review
- Redefining Breast Cancer Care by Harnessing Computational Drug Repositioning.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
- High-Quality In Vivo Chemical Probes for Protein Kinases Disclosed in 2024.ACS pharmacology & translational science · 2025Review
- The Six Ds of Exponentials and drug discovery: A path toward reversing Eroom's law.Drug discovery today · 2025Review
- Advanced Artificial Intelligence Technologies Transforming Contemporary Pharmaceutical Research.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Antifungal and antibiofilm effect of duloxetine hydrochloride against Cryptococcus neoformans and Cryptococcus gattii.Folia microbiologica · 2024Article
- Advances and Challenges of Bioassembly Strategies in Neurovascular In Vitro Modeling: An Overview of Current Technologies with a Focus on Three-Dimensional Bioprinting.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Review
- Phase 0 trials/ Intra-Target-Microdosing (ITM) and the lung: a review.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2024Review
- Prediction of leukemia peptides using convolutional neural network and protein compositions.BMC cancer · 2024Article
- DPI_CDF: druggable protein identifier using cascade deep forest.BMC bioinformatics · 2024Article
- Rapid Prototyping of Thermoplastic Microfluidic 3D Cell Culture Devices by Creating Regional Hydrophilicity Discrepancy.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2024Article
- Active and machine learning-enhanced discovery of new FGFR3 inhibitor, Rhapontin, through virtual screening of receptor structures and anti-cancer activity assessment.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2024Article
225 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite unprecedented investment in pharmaceutical research and development (R&D), the number of new drugs approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) remains low. To help understand this conundrum, this article investigates the record of pharmaceutical innovation by analysing data on the companies that introduced the approximately 1,200 new drugs that have been approved by the FDA since 1950. This analysis shows that the new-drug output from pharmaceutical companies in this period has essentially been constant, and remains so despite the attempts to increase it. This suggests that, contrary to common perception, the new-drug output is not depressed, but may simply reflect the limitations of the current R&D model. The implications of these findings and options to achieve sustainability for the pharmaceutical industry are discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
19949401What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.