ReviewNature reviews. Drug discovery2011
Competitiveness in follow-on drug R&D: a race or imitation?
Review in Nature reviews. Drug discovery, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.
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
21 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bridging the divide between health economics and outcomes research and biomedical investment: reflections from a health economist working in venture capital.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2026Review
- Article
- To Affinity and Beyond: A Personal Reflection on the Design and Discovery of Drugs.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- On drug discovery against infectious diseases and academic medicinal chemistry contributions.Beilstein journal of organic chemistry · 2022Article
- NNAN: Nearest Neighbor Attention Network to Predict Drug-Microbe Associations.Frontiers in microbiology · 2022Article
- Machine learning research towards combating COVID-19: Virus detection, spread prevention, and medical assistance.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2021Article
- Me-too pharmaceutical products: History, definitions, examples, and relevance to drug shortages and essential medicines lists.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2020Review
- Trends in the Price per Median and Mean Life-Year Gained Among Newly Approved Cancer Therapies 1995 to 2017.Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research · 2019Article
- Detecting similar binding pockets to enable systems polypharmacology.PLoS computational biology · 2017Article
- Biosimilars in dermatology.Postepy dermatologii i alergologii · 2015Review
- Competitive pricing within pharmaceutical classes: evidence on "follow-on" drugs in Germany 1993-2008.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2015Article
- Novelty in the target landscape of the pharmaceutical industry.Nature reviews. Drug discovery · 2013Article
- Validating therapeutic targets through human genetics.Nature reviews. Drug discovery · 2013Review
- An early indicator of drug success: Top Journal Selectivity Index.Drug design, development and therapy · 2013Review
- Discovery of small molecule cancer drugs: successes, challenges and opportunities.Molecular oncology · 2012Review
- [Serum-based biomarkers for psychiatric disorders].Der Nervenarzt · 2011Article
- Systems genetics for drug target discovery.Trends in pharmacological sciences · 2011Review
- Medicinal chemistry for 2020.Future medicinal chemistry · 2011Article
- How were new medicines discovered?Nature reviews. Drug discovery · 2011Review
- Elucidating the Inhibitory Potential of Statins Against Oncogenic c-Met Tyrosine Kinase Through Computational and Cell-based Studies.Iranian journal of pharmaceutical research : IJPRArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The development of 'follow on' or 'me too' drugs - generally defined as a drug with a similar chemical structure or the same mechanism of action as a drug that is already marketed - has attracted contrasting views. Some have argued that follow-on drugs often provide useful alternative or enhanced therapeutic options for particular patients or patient subpopulations, as well as introducing price competition. Others, however, consider that the development of such drugs is duplicative and that the resources needed would be better directed elsewhere. Implicit in some of this criticism is the notion that the development of me-too drugs is undertaken after a first-in-class drug has made it to market and proved commercially successful. In this Perspective, using analysis of development and patent filing histories of entrants to new drug classes in the past five decades, we provide new evidence that the development of multiple new drugs in a given class is better characterized as a race, rather than the imitation of successful products.
Indexed as
Identifiers
21151030What 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.