Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26612507›Full record

ArticleNaunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology2016

Preclinical research strategies for newly approved drugs as reflected in early publication patterns.

Ursula Köster, Ingo Nolte, Martin C Michel

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Ursula KösterKlinik für Kleintiere, Tierärztliche Hochschule Hannover, Hannover, Germany.
Ingo NolteKlinik für Kleintiere, Tierärztliche Hochschule Hannover, Hannover, Germany.
Martin C MichelDepartment of Translational Medicine and Clinical Pharmacology, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co KG, Ingelheim, Germany. marmiche@uni-mainz.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The present study aimed to explore early publication patterns (i.e. up to 1 year after obtaining regulatory approval) for newly registered drugs. From the website of the US Food and Drug Administration, all newly approved drugs for 6 calendar years between 1991 and 2011 were identified. Non-clinical original publications for these compounds were retrieved from PubMed and their abstracts analysed for type of study and reported data. This yielded 170 compounds for which 1954 original non-clinical publications were identified, i.e. a median/mean of 5/11.5 publications per compound; however, number of publications per compound varied widely (0-90) and this variation exhibited a non-Gaussian distribution. The earliest non-clinical publication typically was published less than 5 years before regulatory approval and more than 5 years after filing of the primary patent, but some compounds exhibited notable deviations from this pattern. Publications most often reported on efficacy related to the target indication and on potential future indications, with fewer studies addressing mechanisms of action, potency, selectivity, pharmacokinetics and toxic effects. For most compounds, data at the cellular and in vivo level were published, with fewer reports on effects on isolated tissues and even fewer at the molecular level. The preferred species for cellular studies was human, whereas for in vivo studies, it was rats and mice. In 75 % of cases, the lead author of the publication came from an academic institution, and most studies were published in classic pharmacology journals. We conclude that number, timing and scope of early non-clinical publications on newly approved drugs exhibit major variance. Factors potentially associated with such variance are explored in a companion paper.

Indexed as

Drug ApprovalUnited States Food and Drug AdministrationAnimalsBibliometricsDrug Evaluation, PreclinicalHumansPeriodicals as TopicPharmacokineticsResearch DesignTime FactorsToxicity TestsUnited StatesAnimal modelDrug developmentPreclinical researchPublication strategy

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.