Pharma Editorial Guidelines

Indexing Guidelines:
Company/Organization Names
in PipelinePlus

Infodesk
Company Confidential

October 31, 2013

Document Version 1.0
Production Date: 10/31/2013

Indexing Guidelines Company/Organization Names in PipelinePlus

Bonnie Snow

31 October 2013

Document Log
version
1.0

Date
10/31/2013

Comment
Indexing Guidelines
Company/Organization
Names in PipelinePlus

Author
Bonnie Snow

Table of Contents
Introduction: Overall Objectives

Page 3

Choice of a Preferred Term for a Company When Several Name Variations

Are Cited in PP+ Sources

Aliases & Names Shortened for Convenience in Source Records

Historic Names

Newly-Identified Parents of Previously Independent Company Names

Company Name Changes Not Yet Cited in PP+ Databases

Joint Ventures or Collaborations Resulting in Newly-Named Offspring

Other Joint Ventures or Collaborations

7-8

Licensing Agreements

Personal Names Cited in Source Records Company Indexing

Suspected Misspellings or Typographical Errors in Company Names

10

Indexing Guidelines Company/Organization Names in PipelinePlus

Bonnie Snow

31 October 2013

Introduction: Overall Objectives

Provide indexing for organizations associated with pipeline drugs that will enable efficient retrieval of
relevant records through use of a hierarchical taxonomy of preferred terms. By developing a
taxonomy for organization names, Infodesk addresses two problems commonly encountered by
users when searching multiple drug pipeline databases produced by different publishers.
o

The name used to identify a given organization in one source may differ from that used in
another database. Infodesk taxonomy establishes one preferred name for each organization
and maps each variant name found in individual pipeline databases to that preferred term.
Thus, when the user selects a preferred term from the company name list, all variations of
the organizations name are searched. The resulting list of drug records brings together
references to products associated with the same company, regardless of variant names used
to identify it in each source database.

Because Parent companies are not always linked with their subsidiaries or
divisions in pipeline databases, it is difficult to compile data on drugs in development under
the auspices of large corporations with many branches operating under different names.
Accordingly, a second major goal of Infodesk taxonomy is to identify corporate relationships
of this type in a hierarchical index. The View hierarchy option in the PipelinePlus (PP+)
company name index enables display of this portion of the taxonomy. In each Company
Tree, preferred terms for subsidiaries or divisions are indented under Parents, when
relevant. When a user selects a Parent companys preferred term, the resulting query will
automatically search all subsidiaries or divisions indented under it in the Tree. Similarly,
when a specific branch or child term is transferred to the Query Builder, any terms
indented under it will be searched. In effect, the hierarchical company taxonomy in
PipelinePlus represents pre-coordination of associated corporate entities and facilitates
retrieval of multiple, related organization names.

Another underlying goal in the indexing guidelines described in the following pages is increasing the
accessibility of data elements commonly searched by users of pipeline files. An important step
toward accomplishing this is presenting clean lists of company names in the Query Builder, without
the distractions of duplicate entries or synonymous name variations which seem to imply that
multiple terms must be selected to retrieve references to a single corporate entity. Users should be
able to find desired company names quickly and be re-assured, when viewing pertinent hierarchies,
that a thorough search of relevant synonyms and other related terms will be executed behind the
scenes in response to their selection of a PP+ Preferred Term.

Indexing Guidelines Company/Organization Names in PipelinePlus

Bonnie Snow

31 October 2013

1. Choice of a Preferred Term for a Company When Several Name Variations Are Cited in PP+
Sources
Examples: Chimeracom LLC vs Chimeracom
Medeva LTD, Medeva PLC, Medeva Inc
1.1 As a general rule, the Preferred Term (PT) will be the name without qualifiers such as
Inc, A/S, AB, BV, SA, LLC, LTD, Limited, or GmBH, appended. Thus, in the example
above, Chimeracom would be the PT, with the LLC variation mapped to it. In the 2nd
example, Medeva would be the PT, with the three alternatives mapped to it.
1.1.1 Historically, selection of preferred terms for newly-added companies was
automated according to a source precedence rule (TP>RDI>PJB>RDF). Therefore, a
pre-existing preferred term automatically designated by the system when a company
name was initially cited in source databases is not always the appropriate PT per the
rule described above (1.1). When these discrepancies are discovered during
retrospective audits of the taxonomy, new preferred terms -- per the 1.1 guideline --should be added and other variations mapped to them.
1.1.2 Further note: To avoid inadvertent errors in mapping and introduction of new
Preferred Terms that are subsequently found to be variations/synonyms of existing
terms, it is essential that editors conduct thorough searches of the current taxonomy
before approving additions or revisions. If a name under investigation consists of
multiple words (i.e., a phrase, such as Celltech Therapeutics Ltd), a search in the
EditorialWEB should filter by the core keyword (Celltech) to locate possible name
variations and/or related companies that must be taken into account before
constructing a Tree hierarchy.
Examining the alpha and corresponding hierarchical lists of company names
in the PP+ platform is also strongly recommended. Possible errors requiring further
investigation are often easier to detect in the public platform than in the
EditorialWEB and their high visibility within the application prompts questions from
potential customers about quality control in our indexing.
1.2 Possible Exceptions to the general rule: Names that could be ambiguous without
qualifying terms to identify them as Companies. Example: Histogenics Corporation versus
Histogenics as a stand-alone term. Questions regarding possibly ambiguous names should be
raised for resolution in weekly editorial meetings.

Indexing Guidelines Company/Organization Names in PipelinePlus

Bonnie Snow

31 October 2013

2. Aliases & Names Shortened for Convenience in Source Records

Examples: Leo & Leo AB cited as alternatives for Leo Pharma
IBA used for IBA Molecular
2.1 Provided that shortened forms are validated as true synonyms for longer official names
(via examination & comparison of full source records), these abbreviated versions of names
should be mapped to Preferred Terms as synonyms and not appear in the alpha index display
of PTs. In the Comment field for the mapped entry in the EditorialWEB, itemize sources
checked and summarize the basis of the decision that the shortened form is a synonym.
2.1.1 Caution: Some short names in our index, when investigated in source records
and external sources, prove to be separate and distinct companies. Example: Ion (not
related to Ion Beam Applications). Ion was a subsidiary of Sheffield Medical
(synonym=Sheffield, previous name=Sheffield Medical Technologies, later re-named
Sheffield Pharmaceuticals).
2.2 Aliases (typically variations of official names known to be present in primary sources),
such as Chugai Biopharmaceuticals Inc used as an alternative for Chugai Pharma USA,
according to an Elsevier BI company profile. Map to relevant Preferred Term. (These variant
forms should not appear in the alpha index of preferred terms, but will appear when the user
switches to the Include synonyms display.) Again, in the Comment field for the mapped
entry in the EditorialWEB, cite sources checked to arrive at the decision that the alias is,
indeed, a valid synonym.

3. Historic Names
Examples: Theranox superseded by NB Therapeutics (which was formerly Nitric Biotherapeutics
or Nitric Bio).
Adeza Biomedical acquired by Cytyc Prenatal Products, which was a subsidiary of Hologic Inc.
Later, Cytec Prenatal Products was completely merged with Hologic Inc.
3.1 Unlike aliases, historic names cited in source pipeline databases need to remain
accessible in our indexes as Preferred Terms and need to be incorporated into, and
retained in, appropriate company hierarchies.
Following up the 1st example above, the Parent Preferred term would be NB
Therapeutics. Theranox and Nitric Biotherapeutics should each be designated as PTs and
indented under the Parent NB Therapeutics in the company name hierarchy. The
synonym Nitric Bio would be mapped to Nitric Biotherapeutics, but not be adopted as a
PT in its own right. In the 2nd example, both Cytyc Prenatal Products and Adeza
Biomedical would be retained as PTs and each indented as secondary-level nodes under
the parent company Hologic Inc. Use the Comment field in the EditorialWEB to
document the basis of your additions/revisions.

Indexing Guidelines Company/Organization Names in PipelinePlus

Bonnie Snow

31 October 2013

4. Newly-Identified Parents of Previously Independent Company Names

Example: Liponex Inc acquired by ImaSight Inc
4.1 If ImaSight Inc is already a preferred term, Liponex Inc should be indented under it as a
secondary node in a newly-created or revised Tree. If ImaSight Inc has not yet been adopted as a
PT with its own taxonomy code, the first step would be creation of a code for ImaSight. Next,
unapprove the previously independent PT for Liponex Inc. Then, insert the new code for Imasight
Inc in front of the code for Liponex in the Mapping tool. Finally, re-approve the Liponex entry to
create a new Tree reflecting the Parent-Child relationship.

1) Lookup the new parent company to

add to the taxonomy

2) Click Add new taxonomy code to create a

new company

3) Lookup the child company

in the Term Mapping

4) Click Unapproved then Approve to update the hierarchy

information

Indexing Guidelines Company/Organization Names in PipelinePlus

Bonnie Snow

31 October 2013

5. Company Name Changes Not Yet Cited in PP+ databases

Example: Trimedal changed to Stallergene
5.1 Research in external sources, initially conducted to identify whether a Parent Company exists
for an organization cited in one or more PP+ databases, sometimes uncovers additional
information, such as the name change shown above (discovered on Trimedals company Web
site). Although the new name Stallergene is not yet referenced in PP+ records, it should be
assigned its own unique COMP taxonomy code and approved as a Preferred Term in our index.
Trimedal would be retained as a PT (see Guideline re Historic Names - 3.1), but would now be
incorporated as a secondary node into a new Tree, with Stallergene listed as the Parent (toplevel) entry (see 4.1 above for a step-by-step description of the procedure). The policy of adding
company names, even when theyre not yet cited, will help ensure automated term matching
when Stallergene eventually appears in source records and will also invoke appropriate bidirectional (reciprocal) mapping between the old and new names.
6. Joint Ventures or Collaborations Resulting in Newly-Named Offspring
Example: How should our taxonomy recognize the origin of IBA Molecular, a joint venture
resulting from a deal between Ion Beam Applications & SK Capital Partners?
6.1 Generally speaking, venture capital or other funding organizations (such as Trusts) will
NOT be represented in our Company Name taxonomy, nor will their role in joint ventures or
collaborations be reflected in our hierarchies revised to include newly-named corporate
entities cited as offspring of PT companies created by financial deals. SK Capital Partners has
not been adopted as an independent PT in our index and, therefore, need not be recognized in a
Tree relationship such as: Ion Beam Applications SA >> Ion Beam Applications SA-SK Capital Partners >>
IBA Molecular . Instead, the Company Tree reflecting the results of this joint venture or
collaboration would be: Ion Beam Applications SA >> IBA Molecular
6.2 Another example: A collaboration between two organizations, each of which is already
identified as a Preferred Term, AND resulting in formation of a new company or separatelyidentified joint venture name.
Leo Pharma >> Leo Pharma-Charit Universitasmedizin Berlin >> 12DEAL
This joint venture would also be identified in the company Tree for Charit, e.g.: Charit
Universitasmedizin Berlin >> Leo Pharma-Charit Universitasmedizin Berlin >> 12DEAL.
7. Other Joint Ventures or Collaborations
7.1 Collaborations that do not result in creation of separate, newly-named entities will NOT be
recognized in our taxonomy as pre-coordinated entries (hyphen-linked organization names)
indented under the respective Trees of participating companies, universities, etc.
7.1.1 Rationale: Organizations such as Charit have collaborations with many other
companies, few of which are recognized as separately-named entities. Often, the nature of
the agreements is only discussed in the text of source records, so that the individual names
of companies or other organizations involved appear separately in indexing (e.g., co X as

Indexing Guidelines Company/Organization Names in PipelinePlus

Bonnie Snow

31 October 2013

developer, org Y as originator, etc.). To index all of these collaborations accurately would
require detailed review of all records where, for example, Charit is cited.
7.1.2 Examples: RDI drug record: Research programme: anti-prostate cancer therapeutics Stem Cell Therapeutics/The University of York
Another sample record: rhKGF-2 (ophthalmic, corneal injury/keratopathy), Wenzhou Medical
College/Guangdong Jida
Text: Wenzhou Medical College, in collaboration with Guangdong Jida, is
investigating an ophthalmic drop of recombinant human keratinocyte growth factor2 (rhKGF-2) for the potential treatment of corneal injury and keratopathy.
Neither of these collaborations should prompt creation of hyphen-linked entries in our
Company taxonomy, as theyre not recognized as new corporate entities. Since the
collaborators are searchable as individual companies associated with pertinent drug records
where they are cited, the PP+ search interface will enable users to find drug entries where
both names appear.
Note: There is currently no mechanism for ANDing together two or more selections from the
company name list in our Query Builder (multiple selections from the same index are
automatically ORed together). However, more flexible, user-defined logical combinations will
be implemented in future.

8. Licensing Agreements
Example: A.R. Kamm Associates licenses rights to market a drug developed by Recordati SpA
8.1 Should A.R. Kamm Associates be included in Recordati SpAs hierarchy (and vice versa)?
No. Both will be searchable as independent (root) Preferred Terms and would not be added
to the hierarchies (Company Trees) of their respective partners. The agreement did not result
in the formation of a new, legally recognized corporate entity, so Guideline 7.1 (above)
applies.
8.1.1 Rationale: We cannot attempt to associate all licensees with their respective
licensors in our indexes (i.e., pre-coordinate company relationships of this type
there are simply too many!).
Eventually we would like to offer the option to search a company/org name
as a licensee versus an originator or developer. Thus, it would be possible to search
for records where Recordati is the Developer and Kamm is the Licensee.
Currently, Licensees appear in the All Companies list, but only those also
identified in our sources as Developers will lead to results when selected from the
Developer Company list in the Query Builder. Thus, Kamm (a licensee) yields zero
results when searched as a Developer.

Indexing Guidelines Company/Organization Names in PipelinePlus

Bonnie Snow

31 October 2013

9. Personal Names Cited in Source Records Company Indexing

(Typically appear as part of patent information, although corporate or other organization names are
far more common as patent owners -- legally designated as patent assignees)
Examples: Makriyannis, Alexandros et al
Maccecchini, M-L
Maes, L et al
Maruyama, C
Edward Mendell
9.1 Just as corporate and/or university names cited as patent assignees are routinely
indexed as Preferred Terms (or mapped as synonyms, when appropriate) in PP+ taxonomy,
Personal Names can also be designated as PTs. However, a predictable format should
prevail: names cited as part of patent data should be inverted.
Therefore, the Preferred Term for Edward Mendell would be Mendell, Edward -- and
the non-inverted name should be mapped to the PT as a synonym. If a given name is cited by
more than one source (or more than one time in the same source) -- but with variations, any
of these variants should be mapped to the original PT.
Examples: Maes, L or Maes, L et al
Maccecchini, M-L or Maccecchini, ML
Questions to be answered before mapping probable variations for same individual: Is
the personal name associated with same drug, but in different sources? Is the name
associated with other drugs in the same therapeutic or pharmacologic class? Does additional
info supplied in source record(s), such as mention of where employed, indicate the name
variations refer to the same person?
9.2 Company Names that are corporate entities, but also include Personal Names
Examples: A.R. Kamm Associates, M Arkin 1999 Ltd
9.2.1 Index these names as shown in the examples included here: PTs should be in
non-inverted format, as these are legally recognized designations.

Indexing Guidelines Company/Organization Names in PipelinePlus

Bonnie Snow

31 October 2013

10. Suspected Misspellings or Typographical Errors in Company Names

Examples: MedImmune or Medimmune [lower case I] or Medlmmune [lower case l
substituted for uppercase I difficult to detect in type fonts such as Arial or Calibri]
Medical University of Oregan [versus Oregon]
Cheil JE il Pharmaceutical [versus Jeil Pharmaceuticals]
10.1 Only correctly spelled terms should be adopted as Preferred Terms in our taxonomy.
An erroneous entry originating from a source database should be mapped to the correctly
spelled PT as a synonym.
Whenever possible, investigate each case to verify that it represents a misspelling or
typo. This may require checking external sources for company profiles or finding additional
information regarding the drug with which the suspected erroneous name is associated.
When in doubt, present evidence from research, with your recommendations, for further
discussion at a weekly Editorial Team meeting.

For Joint venture relation (50:50)

Agrivir (Medivir/BioAgri joint-venture) ----Preferred

10