ReviewJournal of biosciences2021
Radiopharmaceuticals: An insight into the latest advances in medical uses and regulatory perspectives.
Review in Journal of biosciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advances in Nuclear Medicine Diagnostics: The Promise of Radiolabeled Dendrimers.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Radiopharmaceuticals: Status, Regulatory Landscape and Future Perspective.AAPS PharmSciTech · 2026Review
- Advancements in Targeted Radiopharmaceuticals: Innovations in Diagnosis and Therapy for Enhanced Cancer Management.Chembiochem : a European journal of chemical biology · 2026Review
- Nano-Radiopharmaceuticals in Colon Cancer: Current Applications, Challenges, and Future Directions.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Oldie but Goodie: Is Technetium-99m Still a Treasure Trove of Innovation for Medicine? A Patents Analysis (2000-2022).Journal of medicinal chemistry · 2023Review
- Emulsion Technology in Nuclear Medicine: Targeted Radionuclide Therapies, Radiosensitizers, and Imaging Agents.International journal of nanomedicine · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The growing armamentarium of potential radioisotopes and increased demand for radiopharmaceuticals (RPs) have catapulted their biomedical applications on a trajectory of higher growth in the modern healthcare establishment. Nuclear medicine technology is now regarded as an essential tool for diagnosis, palliation, therapy, and theranostic applications. The associated radiation safety issues need to be emphasized in the form of adequate regulatory action to warrant their safe and effective use. The RPs attracts considerable attention from both pharmaceutical and nuclear regulators due to their constituent pharmaceutical and radioactive components. So, a critical examination of applications of RPs, the latest advances in their development, and the existing regulatory guidelines for RPs have been carried out. This review presents a brief overview of RPs and recent studies on their diagnostic, therapeutic, and theranostic applications. Comprehensive comparative information on regulatory perspectives of RPs in major pharmaceutical jurisdictions such as the United States (US), the European Union (EU), and India reveals ambiguities and heterogeneity. The present studies discuss the importance of RPs in the current healthcare domain, their recent applications, and strive to intensify the concern for an ambient and harmonized regulatory setup.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33753578What 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.