ArticleAmerican health & drug benefits2016
Is a Biologic Produced 15 Years Ago a Biosimilar of Itself Today?
Article in American health & drug benefits, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Biosimilars in Dermatology Review.Journal of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis · 2024Review
- Biosimilar Uptake: The Importance of Healthcare Provider Education.Pharmaceutical medicine · 2021Article
- Review
- Review
- Pharmacovigilance of biosimilars - Why is it different from generics and innovator biologics?Journal of postgraduate medicineReview
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
Much of the testing required for the regulatory approval of a biosimilar is focused on proving that the new drug is sufficiently similar to the reference biologic in structure, pharmacokinetics or pharmacodynamics, clinical efficacy, and safety. However, the reference drug may itself have gone through some changes in the years since its approval, including those caused by alterations in the manufacturing process. Do these changes increase the risk that the reference drug may cause unexpected outcomes? It is up to the US Food and Drug Administration to decide whether the changes merit the need for additional studies to confirm that the drug meets the structural or clinical outcomes standard for the reference agent. Although it is extremely rare, a change in the production of one biologic drug (ie, epoetin alfa) did result in unanticipated serious immunologic side effects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28465779PMC5394562What 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.