ReviewNature reviews. Clinical oncology2015
After counterfeit Avastin®--what have we learned and what can be done?
Review in Nature reviews. Clinical oncology, 2015. 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, 50 citations in OpenAlex.
- Disproportionality analysis of off-label intravitreal bevacizumab in the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System database.Therapeutic advances in drug safety · 2026Article
- Comprehensive promotion of drug traceability codes in China in 2025: challenges and solutions for tertiary outpatient pharmacists.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Article
- Falsified Drugs in the Opinion of Patients Diagnosed with Cardiovascular Diseases-Nationwide and Cross-Sectional Study on the Example of EU-Member Country.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Article
- Eliminating poor quality medicines: 'Caveat emptor, Caveat venditor' (buyer beware, seller beware).International health · 2018Article
- Bevacizumab in Colorectal Cancer: Current Role in Treatment and the Potential of Biosimilars.Targeted oncology · 2017Review
- Digital danger: a review of the global public health, patient safety and cybersecurity threats posed by illicit online pharmacies.British medical bulletin · 2016Review
- Glioma Stem Cells and Their Microenvironments: Providers of Challenging Therapeutic Targets.Stem cells international · 2016Review
- Intravitreal administration of bevacizumab: pros and cons.Daru : journal of Faculty of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences · 2015Article
- Medicine quality in high-income countries: The obstacles to comparative prevalence studies.Medicine access @ point of careArticle
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Three years have passed since the FDA announced that it had detected counterfeit versions of the injectable anticancer drug bevacizumab (Avastin(®), Genentech, USA) in the US drug-supply chain. Following this discovery, almost 1,000 FDA warning letters were sent to physicians and medical practices in 48 different states and two US territories, as more batches of counterfeit Avastin were uncovered. In response, criminal prosecutions have been pursued against certain distributors and clinicians, and other individuals who trafficked, sold, purchased, and/or administered an unsafe and ineffective treatment while also defrauding the government. Although limited and targeted legal action has been taken, patients potentially affected by this seminal patient safety event have not been appropriately identified. Hence, despite the clear and documented patient-safety and public-health risks posed by the transnational criminal trade in counterfeit medicines, the case study of counterfeit bevacizumab detection in the USA demonstrates the continued lack of information, knowledge, and solutions that would be necessary to protect those who are most affected--the patients. In response, we call for greater investment in multisector, multistakeholder strategies to enhance surveillance for counterfeit medicines and enable improvements in communication of risk information, to better protect patients with cancer.
Indexed as
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.