ReviewAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Differences in Patient Access to Newly Approved Antibacterial Drugs in EU/EEA Countries.
Review in Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. 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.
- Factors Determining the Antimicrobial Effectiveness of Chitosan: A Critical Analysis of the Impact of Molecular Weight and Degree of Deacetylation.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Mechanisms of Bacterial Resistance and Innovative Strategies to Overcome Antimicrobial Resistance.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Antimicrobial Resistance: The Answers.British journal of biomedical science · 2026Review
- Epidemiological Trends of Carbapenemase-ProducingAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Genetic Mechanisms of Antimicrobial Non-Susceptibility to Novel Fluoroquinolone Delafloxacin Among Bulgarian Clinical Isolates ofCurrent issues in molecular biology · 2025Article
- Combating Multidrug-ResistantInfection and drug resistance · 2025Review
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.
Funding
Abstract
The introduction of antibiotics in the beginning of the 20th century was one of the most important scientific breakthroughs in history. However, in recent decades, the growing threat of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) has shown the limitations of the current research and development programs for new antimicrobial drugs. In the last decade, 20 antibiotics, 7 β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitor (BL/BLI) combinations and 4 non-traditional antibacterial drugs have been launched worldwide.
methodsThis study aimed to assess the time to patient access for new antibacterial drugs in countries in the European Union and the European Economic Area (EU/EEA). Time differences in marketing authorization from the U.S. Food and Drug Agency (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) were also described, as well as the availability of each drug in the countries in the EU/EEA according to the national competent authorities.
resultsSubstantial differences between countries were observed, with no or only one new drug available in some countries.
conclusionsImproving pricing and reimbursement timelines and fostering collaboration between national health authorities and market authorization holders can enhance timely and equitable patient access to new antibacterial treatments in Europe. Equitable and sustainable access to antibacterial drugs is a cornerstone in the battle against AMR.
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.