1. Decisions on submitted articles rely solely on expert, professional reviewers and remain free from biased or personal viewpoints.
2. The publisher is committed to preserving authors' individual, academic, and research experiences.
3. Submitted articles are monitored and examined for plagiarism.
4. Adherence to ethical principles is strictly monitored by the editing manager, scientific editors, the editorial board, and reviewers.
5. Necessary modifications, explanations, and withdrawals are made where needed.
6. Any proven misconduct is addressed accordingly.
7. The publisher commits to publishing any necessary modifications, clarifications, and reviews relevant to its publications.

1. Editors have full authority to reject or accept a manuscript.
2. Editors maintain confidentiality of submitted manuscripts under review or until published.
3. The Editor-in-Chief decides on submitted manuscripts, published or not, with other editors and reviewers.
4. Editors preserve the anonymity of reviewers.
5. Editors disclose and try to avoid any conflict of interest.
6. Editors maintain academic integrity and strive to meet the needs of readers and authors.
7. Editors investigate plagiarism and fraudulent-data issues, and publish corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies when needed.
8. Editors limit themselves to the intellectual content.
9. Editors do not disclose information about submitted manuscripts to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
10. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted paper are not used by the editor or editorial board members for their own research without the author's explicit written consent.

1. Reviewers assist editors in deciding whether to publish submitted manuscripts.
2. Reviewers maintain confidentiality of manuscripts they are invited to review.
3. Reviewers provide timely comments to help editors reach a publication decision.
4. Reviewers treat manuscripts as confidential and do not use information obtained through peer review for personal advantage.
5. Reviewers' comments are technical, professional, and objective.
6. Reviewers do not review manuscripts where they have a conflict of interest with any author, company, or institution.
7. Reviewers disclose and try to avoid any conflict of interest.

1. Manuscripts must be submitted only in English, written with sound grammar and proper terminology.
2. Manuscripts must not have been published elsewhere and must not be under consideration by another journal or publisher.
3. The corresponding author ensures that all co-authors have approved the manuscript's publication.
4. To sustain the peer-review system, authors are obligated to participate in reviewing manuscripts from others.
5. Authors ensure manuscripts from a particular institution are submitted with that institution's approval.
6. Submission implies the authors permit editing of the paper for readability.
7. Authors must clearly identify financial support for the research and/or manuscript preparation and briefly describe the funder/sponsor's role.
8. All authors agree to allow the corresponding author to correspond with the editorial office regarding the edited manuscript and proof.
9. Authors who discover a significant error in their own published work must promptly notify the editor or publisher to retract or correct it.
10. All submitted and published manuscripts are subject to screening using plagiarism-prevention software; plagiarism is a serious violation of publication ethics.
11. All authors must have read the submission final checklist before submission to TPB.

1. Peer review process: TPB is a double-blind peer-reviewed electronic and print publication issued semiannually, concerned with all aspects of pharmaceutical biotechnology sciences. This process, and any related policies, is clearly described on the journal's website (Peer Review Process).
2. Governing Body: TPB has a solid editorial board whose members are recognized experts in the subject areas within the journal's scope. Full names and affiliations of the journal's editors are provided on the journal's website (Editorial Board).
3. Contact information: The journal provides contact information for the editorial office of TPB (Contact Us).
4. Author fees / Access: The journal database is fully open access; full text of published articles is freely available to everyone. Authors are required to pay an Article Processing Charge (APC).
5. Identification of and dealing with allegations of research misconduct: The Editor-in-Chief takes reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers involving research misconduct, including plagiarism, citation manipulation, and data falsification/fabrication.
6. Web site: The journal's website reflects care taken to ensure high ethical and professional standards.
7. Name of journal: The name Trends in Pharmaceutical Biotechnology (TPB) is unique and not easily confused with other journals.
8. Conflicts of interest: Authors are asked to declare any conflicts of interest when submitting articles to TPB, via the Conflict of Interest Disclosure form.
9. Publishing schedule: The journal's periodicity is clearly indicated on the TPB website.
10. Archiving: The journal's plan for electronic backup and preservation of content access is clearly indicated on the TPB website.

Sanctions

TPB applies a graduated, proportionate response to documented violations of the above policies, based on the severity of the infraction, the stage at which it is identified, and whether it appears intentional or repeated. The specific procedure is set out under Handling Cases of Misconduct below. Depending on severity, TPB may apply one or more of the following, individually or in combination:

• Rejection of the infringing manuscript, and — where the same conduct is evident in other pending submissions by the same author(s) — rejection of those submissions as well.
• For serious or repeated violations: a submission restriction to TPB (and, where the publisher is jointly informed of the same conduct across its journals, to the affected journal(s)) for a period proportionate to the severity of the case, up to a maximum of 5 years in extreme or repeated cases.
• Removal from, or ineligibility to join, the TPB editorial board or reviewer pool, for cases involving proven misconduct.
• Notification of the author's affiliated institution, where the case is serious or the author does not respond satisfactorily.

No sanction beyond rejection of the manuscript is applied without first giving the corresponding author the opportunity to respond, as described below.

1. The Editor first informs the Editorial Office, supplying relevant material and a draft letter to the corresponding author requesting a nonjudgmental explanation.
2. If the explanation is unacceptable and serious unethical conduct appears to have occurred, the matter is referred to the Publication Committee via the Editorial Office, which decides whether a submission ban is warranted.
3. For less severe infractions, the Editor, on the Committee's advice, sends a letter of reprimand; if already published, the author may be asked to publish a correcting apology.
4. The corresponding author is notified. Any work by the responsible author(s), or coauthored work under review by TPB, is rejected immediately.
5. The author(s) are barred from serving on the TPB editorial board or as reviewers. TPB reserves the right to take further action.
6. In extreme cases, notifications are sent to the authors' affiliations, and the authors are barred from submitting to TPB for 5 years.
7. In serious fraud cases resulting in retraction, a retraction notice is published and linked to the article online, and the article is marked "retracted" with the retraction date.

1. The editorial manager has full authority to accept or reject a received manuscript.
2. The editorial manager maintains confidentiality of received manuscripts under review until publication.
3. The editorial manager decides on received manuscripts, consulting other editors and reviewers as needed.
4. The editorial manager and editors preserve reviewer confidentiality and support free, unbiased reviews.
5. The editorial manager and editors avoid any conflict of interest.
6. The editorial manager and editors preserve scientific integrity and meet readers' and authors' needs.
7. The editorial manager and editors thoroughly review plagiarism, falsification, and data issues, and publish modifications, explanations, withdrawals, and apologies as needed.
8. The editorial manager and editors restrict themselves to intellectual content.
9. The editorial manager does not disclose manuscript data to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential editors, editorial consultants, and the publisher.
10. Manuscripts and unpublished materials are not used by the editorial manager or editorial board for their own or others' research without the author's explicit written consent.
11. The scientific editors determine possible plagiarism, falsification, and fraud, making modifications, explanations, and withdrawals as needed.
12. The editorial manager ensures scientific quality through peer review and editorial board advice, maintaining confidence in ethical standards.
13. The editorial manager ensures ethical correctness of published materials and authors' adherence to journal guidelines.
14. The editorial manager investigates suspected research misconduct, notifying responsible author(s) and requesting explanation within two months; unconvincing or absent explanations lead to formal investigation per the journal's misconduct-handling regulations.
15. Misconduct may be identified by the editorial manager independently or via an ethics committee, and addressed through withdrawal from publication, retraction with a public withdrawal history, correction in the next issue, or a period of non-acceptance of future submissions by the author(s).
16. The editorial manager reviews, selects, and prioritizes submitted manuscripts fairly and impartially, based solely on scientific and technical merit — significance, innovation, transparency, credibility, and conformity with the journal's scope — free from unrelated factors.
17. The editorial manager requires the corresponding author to document the nature and extent of each author's contribution, signed by all authors.
18. The editorial manager or editorial board selects reviewers with the greatest relevant expertise and no known conflict of interest.
19. The editorial manager provides reviewers and editorial board members with sufficient information on the journal's process, reminding them of confidentiality requirements and keeping them updated on policy.
20. The relationship between editorial managers and the journal's publishers/owners is based on the principle of editorial independence — full independence in accept/reject decisions, free from pressure by publishers or owners.
21. The editorial manager ensures confidentiality of data related to research participants; where needed, authors may be asked to disclose identity via signed informed consent forms.
22. The editorial manager maintains specific policies to manage any conflict of interest involving themselves, staff, authors, reviewers, or the editorial board.

1. Reviewers cooperate with scientific editors to reach publication decisions.
2. Reviewers preserve data confidentiality.
3. Reviewers submit their views to scientific managers within the agreed timeframe.
4. Reviewers keep submitted articles confidential and do not use their data for personal purposes.
5. Reviewers' views are scientific, technical, and professional.
6. Reviewers decline manuscripts with a conflict of interest involving an author, company, or institution, and inform the editor if one exists.
7. Reviewers and authors refrain from communicating directly during the review process; any necessary outside consultation requires the editorial manager's permission.
8. Reviewers conduct their review impartially, based solely on scientific and technical merit, unaffected by personal relationships with the author(s).
9. Reviewers only accept manuscripts within their area of expertise, informing the editorial manager otherwise.
10. Reviewers assess strengths and weaknesses and, where possible, recommend solutions, respecting the authors' intellectual independence.
11. Reviewers inform the editorial manager of any non-compliance with these guidelines.

1. Contracts between authors and research sponsors must not prevent the declaration of a conflict of interest, nor obligate removal or non-publication of undesired findings. Authors must avoid accepting such conditions at contract signature.
2. Authors have full discretion in selecting where to publish their manuscripts; any obligation to publish in particular journals to enhance credibility is prohibited.

1. The editor retains full authority to submit manuscripts to independent reviewers, and to accept or decline them, exactly as with regular issues.
2. Any special-issue sponsor must be clearly identified.
3. All other provisions of this guide apply to special issues just as they do to regular issues.