Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40186719›Full record

ReviewClinical and experimental medicine2025

Biosimilars versus biological therapy in inflammatory bowel disease: challenges and targeting strategies using drug delivery systems.

Ahmed Aljabri, Ghareb M Soliman, Yasmin N Ramadan, Mohammed A Medhat, Helal F Hetta

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical and experimental medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Practical guidelines on medical management of adults with moderate-to-severe inflammatory bowel disease.Saudi journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Saudi Gastroenterology Association · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Roles of Deubiquitinases OTUD3 and OTUD5 in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  15. Review
  16. 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

5 authors.

Ahmed AljabriDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, Faculty of Pharmacy, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7049-9826
Ghareb M SolimanDepartment of Pharmaceutics, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Tabuk, Tabuk, 71491, Saudi Arabia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9674-1254
Yasmin N RamadanDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, Faculty of Pharmacy, Assiut University, Assiut, 71515, Egypt. yasmeennassr2@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0008-7374-9334
Mohammed A MedhatDepartment of Tropical Medicine and Gastroenterology, Faculty of Medicine, Assiut University, Assiut, 71515, Egypt.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3866-2283
Helal F HettaDivision of Microbiology, Immunology and Biotechnology, Department of Natural Products and Alternative Medicine, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Tabuk, Tabuk, 71491, Saudi Arabia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8541-7304

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a multifactorial illness with a climbing prevalence worldwide. While biologics are commonly prescribed especially for severe cases, they may worsen patients' outcomes due to financial burden. Consequently, there has been an increased focus on biosimilars to improve overall disease outcomes by maintaining similar efficacy and safety while minimizing the cost of therapy. Infliximab-dyyb was the first biosimilar approved by US-FDA for IBD. Since that, the US-FDA approved 14 biosimilars with different mechanisms of action and different routes of administration for IBD patients (four infliximab biosimilars, nine adalimumab biosimilars, and most recently one ustekinumab biosimilar). It should be noted that more biologics are in the pipeline as golimumab and natalizumab patents are set to expire in the near future, and biosimilars are now in pre-clinical to phase 3 trials. Different studies have evaluated biologics' effectiveness and safety and concluded that the majority of available biosimilars are efficacious and have similar adverse effect profiles compared to their reference biologics. It is worth mentioningthat post-marketing surveillance reports revealed some risks associated with biosimilars which should be taken into consideration in future research and clinical trials to avoid health hazards. Most biologics and biosimilars are administered parenterally which results in several drawbacks such as raised risk of infections, hypersensitivity, autoimmunity, development of malignancies, liver toxicity as well as worsening of heart failure. Several drug delivery systems based on passive and active targeting mechanisms are under active investigation to overcome these limitations. This review sheds light on the emergence of biologics and biosimilars as alternatives in IBD management, the differences between them, challenges and risks, and future perspectives in IBD therapy and new trends in drug delivery systems.

Indexed as

Biological TherapyBiosimilar PharmaceuticalsDrug Delivery SystemsInflammatory Bowel DiseasesBiological ProductsHumansBiological ProductsBiosimilar PharmaceuticalsAdalimumabBiologicsBiosimilarsDrug delivery systemInflammatory bowel diseaseInfliximabUstekinumab

Identifiers

PMID40186719
PMCPMC11972199

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.