Adalimumab around the world: comparative analysis of products characteristics and patient support systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Following the expiration of the adalimumab originator patent, there has been a rapid increase in the availability and uptake of adalimumab biosimilars. While chemically and clinically similar in effects, there are substantial non-pharmacological differences in these products. This global review compares the originator versus currently available adalimumab biosimilars, focusing on variations in formulations and patient support systems across different countries. The goal is to provide prescribers with guidance on selecting the most appropriate products. Data on adalimumab biosimilars were collected from global medication registries and Product Information documents, supplemented by direct inquiries to pharmaceutical companies, with data collection completed in September 2024. Experts from nine countries assessed the local patient support system and collaborated to illustrate the diversity of adalimumab. Including the originator, there are 29 adalimumab products available globally. We highlighted products with favorable characteristics, including delivery device, concentration, citrate content, the range of dosages, latex content, and shelf life. Patient support services helped to differentiate these products further, to capture market share. Among the reviewed countries, Australia, the United States, and Canada offered the most comprehensive patient support systems, including injection training, reminders, as well as nursing and other patient support services. This review highlights the global diversity of adalimumab products, emphasizing key usability factors, such as formulation, dosing flexibility, shelf life, and patient support. A comparative table is provided to aid clinicians in selecting the most appropriate option based on individual patient needs.
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 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) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".