Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34852652›Full record

ArticleJournal of diabetes science and technology2023

Assessing the Structural and Functional Similarity of Insulin Glargine Biosimilars.

Gayatri Vishwakarma, Neh Nupur, Anurag S Rathore

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

3 authors.

Gayatri VishwakarmaDepartment of Chemical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi, India.
Neh NupurDepartment of Chemical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi, India.
Anurag S RathoreDepartment of Chemical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi, India.ORCID 0000-0002-5913-4244

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA biosimilar product is expected to exhibit similar safety, efficacy, and quality as that of the approved reference product. Only a few reports of thorough evaluation of the quality of insulin glargine biosimilars are available in literature. Here, we examine the structural and functional similarity of biosimilars of insulin glargine, the first basal long-acting insulin analogue with respect to its innovator product (Lantus

methodsStructural similarity was established using mass spectrometry, chromatographic, and spectroscopic techniques. Stability was compared by performing accelerated thermal stress studies. Functional similarity was established via in vitro assay.

resultsBiosimilar 4 exhibited greater content of high molecular weight species (HMWs) (0.80%) and related substances (RS) (0.45±0.06%) vs others (HMWs of 0.04% and RS of 0.17%). Biosimilars 1 and 3 exhibited higher rate of impurity generation (0.78% and 0.73% per week, respectively), as compared with other drug products (0.02% to 0.43% per week). Furthermore, %aggregation at 14 days was found to statistically correlate (

conclusionsWhile an overall structural and functional similarity was observed across insulin glargine biosimilars with respect to the innovator product, low amounts of product-related variants were seen in some biosimilars and these impact product stability. The %aggregation at 14 days exhibits statistical correlation with %aggregation at 0 day and the number of months from expiry. The order of biosimilarity was denoted as Lantus

Indexed as

Biosimilar PharmaceuticalsHumansInsulin GlargineBiosimilar PharmaceuticalsInsulin Glargineanalytical similaritybiosimilarscritical quality attributesinsulin glargineLantus®

Identifiers

PMID34852652
PMCPMC10012360

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.