ReviewClinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology2016
Biosimilars: potential implications for clinicians.
Review in Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Why Product Drift Is Not an Issue for Biosimilars/Biologics: Start the Same, Stay the Same.BioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy · 2026Review
- An Institutional Guide for Formulary Decisions of Biosimilars.Hospital pharmacy · 2023Review
- Patients' beliefs and behaviours are associated with perceptions of safety and concerns in a hypothetical biosimilar switch.Rheumatology international · 2021Article
- Worldwide Network for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (WBMT) perspective: the role of biosimilars in hematopoietic cell transplant: current opportunities and challenges in low- and lower-middle income countries.Bone marrow transplantation · 2020Review
- Biosimilars in dermatology: The wind of change.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2019Review
- Knowledge and use of biosimilars in oncology: a survey by the European Society for Medical Oncology.ESMO open · 2019Article
- A bibliometric analysis of the global research on biosimilars.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2018Article
- Analytical characterization of recombinant hCG and comparative studies with reference product.Biologics : targets & therapy · 2018Article
- Is a Biologic Produced 15 Years Ago a Biosimilar of Itself Today?American health & drug benefits · 2016Article
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
With the expiration of patent protection for several biologics looming, the production of highly similar therapeutic agents has begun to emerge on the pharmaceutical market. These alternative drugs are referred to as biosimilars. Many anticipate that the introduction of these agents will result in a reduction in health care costs, which may create a more affordable biopharmaceutical market and also improve patient access. In contrast to generics, which are exact copies of their original products, biosimilars are not identical to their reference products. Due to concern about the safety and efficacy of biosimilars, separate regulatory approval pathways have been developed and implemented by several countries, including the US and Europe. Europe has led the way in acceptance of biosimilars into mainstream clinical practice. Biosimilars are not generic products and require extensive clinical and nonclinical bioequivalence studies before receiving marketing approval. Not only is there a lengthy developmental process, but also they will likely be required to have postmarketing surveillance and ongoing safety monitoring to keep track of issues that may arise, such as immunogenicity. Although US Food and Drug Administration approved the first biosimilar product in March 2015, physicians remain unfamiliar about their indications.
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.