MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2978147562 · doi:10.22270/ijdra.v7i3.341

Regulatory architecture of biosimilars in Singapore: A critical overview

2019· article· en· W2978147562 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Soundarya Reddy Kalva, Sahitya Reddy Kalva, Sudheer Kumar Gumme

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Drug Regulatory Affairs · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBiosimilars and Bioanalytical Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiosimilarBusinessBiological drugsProduct (mathematics)Agency (philosophy)MedicineClinical trialTraditional medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A Biosimilar medicine is a medicine which is similar to a biological medicine that has already been authorized (the „biological reference medicine‟). The expiration of the patents on many biological products has prompted the development of these products as similar biological products. The European Medicinal Agency (EMEA) has done a commendable job at creating the regulatory path to facilitate approval of biosimilars. The Health Product Act requires all medicinal products sold in Singapore and manufactured locally for export to be licensed with the Health Products Regulation Group, Health Science Authority (HAS). Biosimilar products are eligible for the New Drug Application (NDA-2 and NDA-3) application types. The Biosimilar product should be evaluated and approved by at least one of HAS‟s reference agencies namely Australia, Health Canada, Europe, United States. Approved biosimilars must be demonstrated, through extensive characterization and appropriate clinical trials, to be as safe and effective as originators for the benefit of patients.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.184

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0160.012
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0070.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Drug Regulatory AffairsSame topicBiosimilars and Bioanalytical MethodsFrench-language works237,207