ReviewBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2019
Biosimilars of low molecular weight heparins: Relevant background information for your drug formulary.
Review in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- An Overview of Anticoagulant Drugs Pharmacology, Therapeutic Approaches, Limitations and Perspectives.Pharmaceutics · 2026Review
- A Descriptive Analysis of Direct Oral Anticoagulant Drugs Dosing Errors Based on Spontaneous Reports from the EudraVigilance Database.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Bioequivalence of a biosimilar enoxaparin (Cloti-Xa™) and its innovator (ClexanePharmacology research & perspectives · 2022Review
- Biosimilars of low molecular weight heparins: Relevant background information for your drug formulary.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Biosimilars of low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs) are more alike the originator than different branded LMWHs. The latter differ largely in molecular weight, anti-FXa/anti-FIIa ratio and antithrombin binding. The Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency guidelines are sufficient for the clinical use of high quality LMWHs. However, the Food and Drug Administration guideline lacks the results of a phase I clinical trial in the approval process. Most information about biosimilars is available for enoxaparin given that many biosimilars of enoxaparin have received market access. The guidelines of many International Thrombosis Societies for LMWH biosimilars are too stringent, not updated and impractical for formulary uptake discussions. This review gives background information on critical factors for the formulary uptake process of LMWHs with special attention for the use of the System of Objectified Judgment Analysis/Infomatrix model.
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.