Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30062175›Full record

ArticleJACC. Basic to translational science2017

Overcoming the Declining Trends in Innovation and Investment in Cardiovascular Therapeutics: Beyond EROOM's Law.

Gail A Van Norman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JACC. Basic to translational science, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. (3D) Bioprinting-Next Dimension of the Pharmaceutical Sector.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  8. Molecular origin and biological effects of exercise mimetics.Journal of exercise science and fitness · 2024
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Phase II Trials in Drug Development and Adaptive Trial Design.JACC. Basic to translational science · 2019
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
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

1 author.

Gail A Van NormanDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Eroom's law (Moore's law spelled backwards), describes adverse trends towards declining innovation and rising costs of drug development over the last several decades. Therapeutics for cardiovascular diseases (CVD) appear to have been particularly sensitive to these trends. Thirty-three percent fewer CVD therapeutics were approved between 2000 and 2009 compared to the previous decade, and the number of CVD drugs starting all clinical trial stages declined in both absolute and relative numbers between 1990 and 2012. In the last 5 years, drugs to treat CVD disease comprised just 6% of all new drug launches. This review discusses the decline in CVD therapeutics, the reasons behind it, and ways in which this trend is being or might be addressed.

Indexed as

CVD, cardiovascular diseasedrug approvalEroom’s lawFDA, Food and Drug AdministrationinnovationNIH, National Institutes of HealthOD, orphan drugPPMD, parent project muscular dystrophyRCT, randomized controlled trialsR&D, research and developmentROI, return on investmentSDLT, severely debilitating or life-threateningTB, tuberculosis

Identifiers

PMID30062175
PMCPMC6058942

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.