Navigating the Regulatory Pathways and Requirements for Tissue-Engineered Products in the Treatment of Burns in the United States

In the burn treatment landscape, a variety of skin substitutes, human tissue-sourced products, and other products are being developed based on tissue engineering (ie, the combination of scaffolds, cells, and biologically active molecules into functional tissue with the goal of restoring, maintaining, or improving damaged tissue or whole organs) to provide dermal replacement, prevent infection, and prevent or mitigate scarring. Skin substitutes can have a variety of compositions (cellular vs acellular), origins (human, animal, or synthetically derived), and complexities (dermal or epidermal only vs composite).The regulation of tissue-engineered products in the United States occurs by one of several pathways established by the US Food and Drug Administration, including a Biologics License Application, a 510(k) (Class I and Class II devices), Premarket Approval (Class III devices), or a human cells, tissues, and cellular and tissue-based products designation. Key differentiators among these regulatory classifications include the amount and type of data required to support filing. For example, a Biologics License Application requires a clinical trial(s) and evaluation of safety and efficacy by the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research. Applicable approved biologic products must also comply with submission of advertising and promotional materials per regulations.This review provides a description of, and associated requirements for, the various regulatory pathways for the approval or clearance of tissue-engineered products. Some of the regulatory challenges for commercialization of such products for the treatment of burns will be explored.

The method history report: an adaptable tool for communicating immunogenicity assay development and validation

Over the developmental lifetime of a therapeutic protein, the immunogenicity assay validation history can become substantial, frustrating review of clinical immunogenicity within the biologics license application. In our experience, this can lead to questions by regulators, resulting in numerous information requests during the review process. To address this, we propose a new document, the method history report (MHR), which can comprehensively present the history of the immunogenicity assay for regulators, including assay development and validation. The flexibility of the MHR allows for adaptation to the specific needs of each therapeutic program, while maintaining a consistent template. Here, we detail the rationale, general outline and template for the MHR and recommend others consider adopting it for their biologics license application-related activities.

STUDY ON REGISTRATION AND REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS FOR VACCINES IN USA, EUROPE AND CANADA

In recent years vaccines are the foremost necessary health intervention globally. An immunizing agent could also be a biological preparation that will increase the immunity to a specific wellness. The development of an immunizing agent could be a posh and tedious method. A strict regulatory guidelines used to figure out the protection, efficacy, and quality should be achieved throughout the development of a vaccine for its authorization. In USA biologics were regulated by the Centre for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) beneath USFDA. In Europe, European Medicines Agency (EMA) regulates the biologics and authorization is granted by the European Commission (EC). In Canada, vaccines are regulated by Biologics and Genetics Therapy Directorate (BGTD) under Health Canada (HC). For Registration of vaccine, Biologics license application (BLA) in USA, marketing authorization application (MAA) in EU and New Drug Submission (NDS) Application in Canada ought to be submitted. While registration of a vaccine, post-marketing surveillancestudies such as VAERS should be done in USA, Pharmacovigilance system in Europe and Canadian Adverse Events Following immunization surveillance system (CAEFISS) in Canada monitors the safety of a vaccine.