MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2365230523

Market Analysis and the R&D Trend for Recombinant Protein Therapeutics

2006· article· en· W2365230523 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Qi-Min Zhan

Bibliographic record

VenueLetters in Biotechnology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAnimal Genetics and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecombinant DNAQuarter (Canadian coin)Drug developmentMedical prescriptionBusinessPolitical scienceBiotechnologyMarketingDrugBiologyGeographyPharmacology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The first of its kind drug, recombinant human insulin(Humulin) received administrative approval in America in 1982. A quarter of a century later, recombinant protein drug represents a sector undergoing the fastest growth, accounting for 7%~8% of today's market of prescription drugs. Among the 82 recombinant proteins therapeutics licensed so far, 18 are block-busters with the annual sale of 27 billion dollars in 2005, which is 66% of the total sale of 41 billion for the whole sector. Year 2006 observed several landmark events in this field, including the approval of the first inhalational insulin by US and EU, and the marketing of the first recombinant drug produced in transgenic animals and the first generic recombinant drug in EU. While it is blooming, how long will the blossom last? In this article, the market of the recombinant protein therapeutics launched in US and EU was dissected by their group sale. In addition, the ongoing research and development efforts in this field were reviewed. Such information should be of help for better judgment of the market trend and for the strategic planning of innovation.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.197
Threshold uncertainty score0.259

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.206 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLetters in BiotechnologySame topicAnimal Genetics and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207