ReviewClinical pharmacology and therapeutics2022
Can Innovative Trial Designs in Orphan Diseases Drive Advancement of Treatments for Common Neurological Diseases?
Review in Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evolution of disease modifying therapy clinical trial design and therapeutic endpoints for Parkinson's disease.Journal of Parkinson's disease · 2026Review
- Exploring synthetic controls in rare diseases with a proof of concept in spinal cord injury.BMC medicine · 2025Article
- Insights into the adoption of innovative clinical trials across therapeutic areas using clinical trials registry data and large Language models.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A structured approach for identifying disease analogs for pulmonary arterial hypertension.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2025Article
- Neurologic orphan diseases: Emerging innovations and role for genetic treatments.World journal of experimental medicine · 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Global regulatory agencies have transformed their approach to approvals in their processes for formal review of the safety and efficacy of new drugs. Opportunities for innovation have expanded because of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Several regulatory-led initiatives have progressed rapidly during the past year, including patient-focused drug development, model-informed drug development, real-world evidence, and complex innovative trial designs. Collectively, these initiatives have accelerated the rate of approvals. Despite demands to focus on urgent needs imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of new drug approvals over the past year, particularly for rare diseases, has outpaced expectations. Advancing therapeutics for nervous system disorders requires adaptive strategies that align with rapid developments in the field. Three relentlessly progressive diseases, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, Duchenne muscular dystrophy, and Parkinson's disease are in urgent need of new treatments. Herein, we propose new regulatory initiatives, including innovative trial designs and patient-focused drug development that accelerate clinical trial conduct while meeting critical regulatory requirements for therapeutic approval.
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.