ArticleBMJ open2013
Decline in new drug launches: myth or reality? Retrospective observational study using 30 years of data from the UK.
Article in BMJ open, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Emerging nanoformulation strategies for phytocompounds and applications from drug delivery to phototherapy to imaging.Bioactive materials · 2022Review
- Regulatory policy and pharmaceutical innovation in the United Kingdom after Brexit: Initial insights.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
- Insights into the biology of fibrodysplasia ossificans progressiva using patient-derived induced pluripotent stem cells.Regenerative therapy · 2019Review
- Organs-On-Chip Models of the Female Reproductive System.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Review
- Trends in the costs of drugs launched in the UK between 1981 and 2015: an analysis of the launch price of drugs in five disease areas.BMJ open · 2019Article
- A microfluidic culture model of the human reproductive tract and 28-day menstrual cycle.Nature communications · 2017Article
- Phytochemicals potently inhibit migration of metastatic breast cancer cells.Integrative biology : quantitative biosciences from nano to macro · 2015Article
- Pivotal clinical trials of novel ophthalmic drugs and medical devices: retrospective observational study, 2002-2012.BMJ open · 2015Observational
- Robotic production of cancer cell spheroids with an aqueous two-phase system for drug testing.Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE · 2015Article
- Observational
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo describe trends in new drugs launched in the UK from 1982 to 2011 and test the hypothesis that the rate of new drug introductions has declined over the study period. There is wide concern that pharmaceutical innovation is declining. Reported trends suggest that fewer new drugs have been launched over recent decades, despite increasing investment into research and development.
designRetrospective observational study. SETTING AND DATA SOURCE: Database of new preparations added annually to the British National Formulary (BNF).
main outcome measuresThe number of new drugs entered each year, including new chemical entities(NCEs) and new biological drugs, based on first appearance in the BNF.
resultsThere was no significant linear trend in the number of new drugs introduced into the UK from 1982 to 2011. Following a dip in the mid-1980s (11-12 NCEs/new biologics introduced annually from 1985 to 1987), there was a variable increase in the numbers of new drugs introduced annually to a peak of 34 in 1997. This peak was followed by a decline to approximately 20 new drugs/year between 2003 and 2006, and another peak in 2010. Extending the timeline further back with existing published data shows an overall slight increase in new drug introductions of 0.16/year over the entire 1971 to 2011 period.
conclusionsThe purported 'innovation dip' is an artefact of the time periods previously studied. Reports of declining innovation need to be considered in the context of their timescale and perspective.
Identifiers
What 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.