ArticlemAbs2017
Evolving patterns in a collaboration network of global R&D on monoclonal antibodies.
Article in mAbs, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Open Innovation and Regulatory Challenges in New Modality Development: The Pivotal Role of Contract Development and Manufacturing Organisations in Advancing Antibody Drugs.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2025Article
- Trends involving monoclonal antibody (mAb) research and commercialization: A scientometric analysis of IMS Lifecycle R&D Focus Database (1980-2016).Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We investigated the evolution process of collaborative inter-organizational network of the research and development (R&D) on monoclonal antibody (mAb) over the past 30 y. The annual detection of the collaboration network provides dynamics on network structures and relationship changes among different organizations. Our research showed continuous growth of the network's scale and complexity due to the constant entry of new organizations and the forging of new partnering relationships. The evolving topological features reveal a core-periphery structure that became clearer over time and an increasing heterogeneity within the collaborative mAb R&D network. As measured by the number of network participants, dedicated biotechnology firms (DBFs) were the dominant organization form in the field of mAb development, but their average centrality was reduced during the period of 2004-2009, when pharmaceutical companies took over the positions of DBFs. Along with the network evolution, 2 waves of substitution on the leading positions were driven by technological innovations and mergers and acquisitions (M&A). In addition, this study analyzed organizational-level behaviors to help understand the evolution of network structures over the field of mAb development across the different technologically innovative or economic contexts.
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.