ArticleClinical and translational science2025
In Vitro Diagnostics for SARS-CoV-2 Infection Authorized in the United States and Approved in Japan.
Article in Clinical and translational science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- In Vitro Diagnostics for SARS-CoV-2 Infection Authorized in the United States and Approved in Japan.Clinical and translational science · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In vitro diagnostics (IVDs) for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) played a critical role in the early detection and management of infection, yet regional disparities in their availability remain underexamined. We retrospectively analyzed molecular and antigen IVDs for SARS-CoV-2 authorized by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and approved by the Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency (PMDA)/Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare (MHLW) in Japan between 2020 and 2023, using publicly available data. The FDA granted Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) to 373 IVDs (302 molecular and 71 antigen), while the PMDA/MHLW approved 153 IVDs (55 molecular and 98 antigen) under the Priority Review system within the regular approval framework. In the United States (US), authorizations surged in early 2020, whereas in Japan, approvals increased more gradually until mid-2021. Real-time polymerase chain reaction and lateral flow immunoassay were the predominant methods for molecular and antigen tests, respectively, in both countries. In Japan, 71% of prescription-only IVDs were developed by domestic companies, compared with 79% in the US. In summary, a greater number of IVDs for SARS-CoV-2 were authorized in the US than were approved in Japan, particularly early in the pandemic. The EUA system in the US facilitated the rapid authorization of IVDs. Japan's Priority Review system enabled rapid approvals, while the newly introduced Emergency Approval system-although not applied to IVDs for SARS-CoV-2-may enable more timely approval and distribution of IVDs in future public health emergencies.
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.