ReviewBiomedicines2023
FDA Approvals of Biologics in 2022.
Review in Biomedicines, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- A new STAT3-based potency assay for human G-CSF analog therapeutics.Journal of pharmaceutical and biomedical analysis · 2025Article
- Review
- Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Approvals of Biological Drugs in 2023.Biomedicines · 2024Review
- Impact of Excipient Extraction and Buffer Exchange on Recombinant Monoclonal Antibody Stability.Molecular pharmaceutics · 2024Article
- Treatment patterns and factors associated with discontinuation of monoclonal antibodies.SAGE open medicine · 2024Article
- Trends in the Development of Antibody-Drug Conjugates for Cancer Therapy.Antibodies (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Stimuli-Responsive Hydrogels for Protein Delivery.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- A Comprehensive Overview of US-FDA-Approved Anticancer Drugs and Biologics in 2023: An Observational Study.Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciencesArticle
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 at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The year 2022 witnessed the control of the COVID-19 pandemic in most countries through social and hygiene measures and also vaccination campaigns. It also saw a decrease in total approvals by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Nevertheless, there was no fall in the Biologics class, which was boosted through the authorization of 15 novel molecules, thus maintaining the figures achieved in previous years. Indeed, the decrease in approvals was only for the category of small molecules. Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) continued to be the drug class with the most approvals, and cancer remained the most targeted disease, followed by autoimmune conditions, as in previous years. Interestingly, the FDA gave the green light to a remarkable number of bispecific Biologics (four), the highest number in recent years. Indeed, 2022 was another year without the approval of an antimicrobial Biologic, although important advancements were made in targeting new diseases, which are discussed herein. In this work, we only analyze the Biologics authorized in 2022. Furthermore, we also consider the orphan drugs authorized. We not only apply a quantitative analysis to this year's harvest, but also compare the efficacy of the Biologics with those authorized in previous years. On the basis of their chemical structure, the Biologics addressed fall into the following classes: monoclonal antibodies; antibody-drug conjugates; and proteins/enzymes.
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.