Examination of the Regulatory Frameworks Applicable to Biologic Drugs (Including Stem Cells and Their Progeny) in Europe, the U.S., and Australia: Part I—A Method of Manual Documentary Analysis

Author:

Ilic Nina12,Savic Snezana1,Siegel Evan3,Atkinson Kerry45,Tasic Ljiljana1

Affiliation:

1. Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia

2. Mater Health Services, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

3. Ground Zero Pharmaceuticals, Irvine, California, USA

4. Mater Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

5. School of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

Abstract

Abstract Recent development of a wide range of regulatory standards applicable to production and use of tissues, cells, and other biologics (or biologicals), as advanced therapies, indicates considerable interest in the regulation of these products. The objective of this study was to analyze and compare high-tier documents within the Australian, European, and U.S. biologic drug regulatory environments using qualitative methodology. Cohort 1 of the selected 18 high-tier regulatory documents from the European Medicines Agency (EMA), the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) regulatory frameworks were subject to a manual documentary analysis. These documents were consistent with the legal requirements for manufacturing and use of biologic drugs in humans and fall into six different categories. Manual analysis included a terminology search. The occurrence, frequency, and interchangeable use of different terms and phrases were recorded in the manual documentary analysis. Despite obvious differences, manual documentary analysis revealed certain consistency in use of terminology across analyzed frameworks. Phrase search frequencies have shown less uniformity than the search of terms. Overall, the EMA framework's documents referred to “medicinal products” and “marketing authorization(s),” the FDA documents discussed “drug(s)” or “biologic(s),” and the TGA documents referred to “biological(s).” Although high-tier documents often use different terminology they share concepts and themes. Documents originating from the same source have more conjunction in their terminology although they belong to different frameworks (i.e., Good Clinical Practice requirements based on the Declaration of Helsinki, 1964). Automated (software-based) documentary analysis should be obtained for the conceptual and relational analysis.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Cell Biology,Developmental Biology,General Medicine

Reference63 articles.

1. Current regulatory issues in cell and tissue therapy;Burger;Cytotherapy,2003

2. Cell processing for clinical trials and commercial manufacture;Prince;Cell Gene Ther,2004

3. Does the FDA have regulatory authority over adult autologous stem cell therapies? 21 CFR 1271 and the emperor's new clothes;Freeman;J Transl Med,2012

Cited by 21 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Exosomes in the Real World of Medical Aesthetics: A Review;Aesthetic Plastic Surgery;2024-02-05

2. Regulatory issues in biological products;Biomedical Product and Materials Evaluation;2022

3. Challenges and strategy in treatment with exosomes for cell-free-based tissue engineering in dentistry;Future Science OA;2021-12

4. Clinical applications for exosomes: Are we there yet?;British Journal of Pharmacology;2021-05-03

5. Standards and Regulatory Frameworks (for Cell- and Tissue-Based Products);Biomedical Product Development: Bench to Bedside;2020

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3