Antibody biosimilars: Fears or opportunities?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The annual "LabEx MAbImprove industrial workshops" are primarily intended to provide scientists involved in therapeutic antibodies, a comprehensive view about topics of interest for the pharmaceutical industry. They are organized by the "LabEx MAbImprove industrial committee", for this first edition especially in partnership with ARITT, the regional agency for innovation and technology transfer which operates in the French Région Centre, the 1st French region for pharmaceutical production. The 2013 edition, held May 28 at the Vinci Center of Tours, was dedicated to antibody biosimilars. Depending on opinions, the impending expiry of antibody patents and the imminent marketing approval of competitors to blockbusters can be perceived as good or bad things. Fears or opportunities? Risks for patients? Breath of fresh air for the health systems? Opportunity for re-industrializing France? In this context, it is necessary for people to form a fair and informed opinion on the current landscape of antibody biosimilars. In particular, this is especially important for scientists from the academic world, from the industry or from the regulation agencies, for pharmacists, for pharmacovigilance specialists, for health authorities, and staff from health insurance and decision makers. The first session was devoted to market and regulatory issues, and included both an overview of the evolution of the patent landscape and a description of biosimilars regulation in the European Union (EU). This session was closed by a talk on manufacturing processes for biosimilars. In the next session, quality control attributes of biosimilars were discussed and compared with the consistent quality of biotechnology products to raise the question: "How close is close enough?" In vitro assays for evaluating the Fc function of therapeutic antibodies were also discussed. The third session focused on development of biosimilars and primarily on the stepwise process for introducing an antibody biosimilar on the EU market, and included a presentation of the ongoing clinical evaluation of an infliximab biosimilar. The session concluded with a rich debate on the indication extrapolation of a biosimilar compared to the originator. The last session was dedicated to societal issues and focused on two aspects: (1) the need of biosimilars for EU health economy; and (2) last but not least, the ethical issues about clinical evaluation of biosimilars. All speakers and attendees enjoyed this very stimulating and rewarding meeting, which gathered many people with divergent scientific backgrounds from the academic or industrial world.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it