Scope of Improvement in the Functioning of National Regulatory Authority—A Step Toward International Accreditation: A Qualitative Study From Pakistan

2019 ◽  
Vol 53 (6) ◽  
pp. 787-794 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raazeyah Ikram ◽  
Anum Saqib ◽  
Irem Mushtaq ◽  
Muhammad Atif
1995 ◽  
Vol 40 (4) ◽  
pp. 171-176 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald Addington

This review examines the scientific and ethical justification for the use of randomized concurrent placebo-controlled trials in the treatment of acute relapse in chronic, schizophrenia. A literature search was conducted, and the national regulatory authority was consulted. Many placebo-controlled studies of acute or chronic schizophrenia are being published and it is the official position of both the Canadian and US regulatory authorities that such studies are required for both scientific and ethical reasons. The specific strengths and limitations of placebo-controlled studies are reviewed. Examples, drawn from Canadian studies, are presented to illustrate their benefits. It is concluded that the use of placebos in the particular situation of acute or chronic schizophrenia is ethically and scientifically justified. It forms an essential component of a comprehensive drug evaluation for new antipsychotic medications.


2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 128-137 ◽  
Author(s):  
Norman W. Baylor

Purpose Before vaccines are marketed and used, they must be evaluated and approved by a national regulatory authority (NRA). The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is the NRA in the USA responsible for overseeing and regulating the manufacturing, marketing, and distribution of vaccines. The paper aims to discuss this issue. Design/methodology/approach Expert review. Findings Developed countries have established governmental regulatory agencies to review and determine the safety and effectiveness of vaccines to ensure that the manufacture, sale, and use of vaccines are adequately regulated. However, even today, many developing countries do not have established NRAs. Furthermore, despite similarities, there are still substantial differences in how regulatory authorities in different countries perform minimum functions required for effective regulation of pharmaceutical products, including vaccines. The World Health Organization (WHO), although not a governmental NRA, uses a consultative approach involving its Expert Committee on Biological Standardization and Biologicals Unit to develop regulatory criteria and identify and consolidate current consensus opinions on key regulatory issues. It is through this approach that WHO informs NRAs on the necessary scientific background required to assess and advise on optimal regulatory approaches and methodologies. This paper will focus on the evolution of the US FDA and its role in regulation of vaccines to illustrate the function of a vaccine NRA. Originality/value Vaccines are an important resource for protecting people and communities from the mortality and morbidity associated with many infectious diseases. The assessment, licensure, control and surveillance of vaccines are the responsibilities of government regulatory authorities.


2015 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-64
Author(s):  
K.L. Karfopoulos ◽  
E. Carinou ◽  
V. Kamenopoulou ◽  
P. Dimitriou ◽  
Ch. Housiadas

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (11) ◽  
pp. 1364-1366 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leticia Mitiko Kobayashi ◽  
Bianca Ramos Marins ◽  
Patrícia Cristina dos Santos Costa ◽  
Hugo Perazzo ◽  
Rodolfo Castro

2011 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 279-282
Author(s):  
Markus Berliner

Article 30(2) of Directive 2002/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications networks and services (Universal Service Directive [USD]) is to be interpreted as obliging the national regulatory authority to take account of the costs incurred by mobile telephone network operators in implementing the number portability service when it assesses whether the direct charge to subscribers for the use of that service is a disincentive. However, it retains the power to fix the maximum amount of that charge levied by operators at a level below the costs incurred by them, when a charge calculated only on the basis of those costs is liable to dissuade users from making use of the portability facility (official headnote).


2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chalachew Alemayehu ◽  
Geoff Mitchell ◽  
Jane Nikles ◽  
Abraham Aseffa ◽  
Alexandra Clavarino

Abstract Background Locally produced generic drugs offer a cost–effective alternative to imported drugs to treat patients in Ethiopia. However, due to a lack of bioequivalence testing, additional assurance tests are needed to build trust in cheaper, locally made drugs. By testing bioequivalence of local drugs to gold standard, N-of-1 tests have the potential to promote patient centred quality use of medicines. Method We sought to assess the acceptability of, and explore barriers to, conducting N-of-1 tests to evaluate local medicines in a resource limited clinical setting. We conducted a descriptive qualitative study, analysing four focus group discussions and five key informant interviews. Participants were senior drug regulatory authority members, institutional review board members, physicians and patients. All interviews were audio taped and transcribed verbatim. Patient interviews were conducted in Amharic and translated to English prior to analysis. Data analysis used an inductive, thematic process. Results Five major themes were identified; (1) Appropriateness of N-of-1 tests to determine the therapeutic equivalence of local drugs, (2) N-of-1 therapeutic equivalence tests: clinical care or research? (3) Ethical and regulatory requirements (IRB), (4) Potential barriers to implementing N-of-1 tests and (5) Possible solutions to identified challenges. The study demonstrated considerable support for using N-of-1 tests for clinical equivalence studies between local and imported medicines, but important impediments were very likely to impact the feasibility of conducting N-of-1 tests in Ethiopia. Key informants from the regulatory authority did not support additional tests of local drugs. There were also mixed opinions regarding ethical requirements for conducting N-of-1 tests. The Institutional Review Board (IRB) members believed that IRB approval was sufficient to conduct N-of-1 tests, however, the regulatory authority members considered that N-of-1 tests constituted a clinical trial, and required approval at the regulatory level. Conclusion This study showed that there were key uncertainties that could impact the feasiblity of using N-of-1 testing local drugs in Ethiopia. Therefore, a number of protocol amendments to address contextual threats and regulatory challenges, would be needed before progressing to conducting these tests.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document