A study of new drug approval pattern of a Southeast Asian developed country from 2017 to 2021

Background: The pattern of new drug approval is changing across the world as shown by the study using Center for Drug Evaluation and Research and European Medicines Agency data in US and UK with more drug approval for anti-cancer and immunomodulator drugs. There is a need to generate similar database for developed South East Asian countries too. Aims and Objectives: This study was conducted for one such country- Singapore for the new drug approval pattern of last 5 years (2017–2021). Materials and Methods: This was a pharmacoepidemiological study, in which government drug regulatory website data available in public domain was searched. The new drug approval data were classified according to active ingredient, drug approval date, new drug application category, indication of drugs, and World Health Organization Anatomic Thoracic Classification. Results: In this study, 418 new drug approvals were found in last 5 years in Singapore. From this maximum, drug approvals were given to anti-neoplastic and immunomodulator category drugs. In anti-neoplastic category new drugs approval few examples were Trastuzumab deruxtecan and Tucatinib for breast cancer therapy and Tepotinib and Capmatinib for non-small cell lung cancer therapy. Conclusion: This study shows that drug development in anti-cancer drug and immunomodulator is significant in Singapore. This trend is quite matching with other country such as US and UK.

Analysis and suggestions on the development trend of drug innovation in China / 中国药科大学学报

@#In order to comprehensivehy evaluate the stage of China in the global drug innovation, to further optimize the environment for drug innovation in China, and to unleash the vitality of drug innovation, this article mainly analyzes through comparison China''s situation of drug innovation in global competition from such perspectives as the current situation of the global drug R&D innovation market, R&D investment, product pipeline, policy support, and development trends, combined with the characteristics of China''s drug innovation development.It can be seen that China''s pharmaceutical innovation is faced with such practical problems as lagging behind some developed countries in terms of innovation development, companies bunching into research and development innovation, sudden research and development rush, and excessive dependence on capital markets for pharmaceutical innovation.Accordingly, this paper puts forward suggestions on continuously improving China''s new drug innovation environment, rationally selecting differentiated competition and new tracks, reasonably formulating drug innovation development strategies, guiding capital to return to innovative research and development, and constructing a "double cycle" strategy for drug innovation.

Regulatory reliance pathways during health emergencies: enabling timely authorizations for COVID-19 vaccines in Latin America / Mecanismos de utilización de las decisiones de autoridades regulatorias de otras jurisdicciones en las emergencias de salud: autorización oportuna de las vacunas contra la COVID-19 en América Latina / Uso de decisões regulatórias de outras autoridades durante emergências sanitárias e a tempestividade da autorização de vacinas contra a COVID-19 na América Latina

ABSTRACT Objectives. To map the timing and nature of regulatory reliance pathways used to authorize COVID-19 vaccines in Latin America. Methods. An observational study was conducted assessing the characteristics of all COVID-19 vaccine authorizations in Latin America. For every authorization it was determined whether reliance was used in the authorization process. Subgroups of reference national regulatory authorities (NRAs) and non-reference NRAs were compared. Results. 56 authorizations of 10 different COVID-19 vaccines were identified in 18 countries, of which 25 (44.6%) used reliance and 12 (21.4%) did not. For the remaining 19 (33.0%) it was not possible to determine whether reliance was used. Reference agencies used reliance less often (40% of authorizations with a known pathway) compared to non-reference agencies (100%). The median review time was just 15 days and does not meaningfully differ between reliance and non-reliance authorizations. Conclusions. This study demonstrated that for these vaccines, despite reliance pathways being associated with numerous rapid authorizations, independent authorization review times were not considerably longer than reliance reviews; reliance pathways were not a prerequisite for rapid authorization. Nevertheless, reliance pathways provided rapid authorizations in response to the COVID-19 emergency.

RESUMEN Objetivos. Determinar dónde y cuándo se usaron las decisiones de autoridades regulatorias de otras jurisdicciones y la naturaleza de estos mecanismos para autorizar vacunas contra la COVID-19 en América Latina. Métodos. Se realizó un estudio observacional para evaluar las características de todas las autorizaciones de vacunas contra la COVID-19 en América Latina. Para cada autorización se determinó si se emplearon las decisiones de autoridades regulatorias de otras jurisdicciones en el proceso de autorización. Se compararon subgrupos de autoridades regulatorias nacionales (ARN) consideradas de referencia con otras ARN no usadas como referencia. Resultados. Se determinó dónde se otorgaron 56 autorizaciones de 10 vacunas diferentes contra la COVID-19 en 18 países; de estas 56 autorizaciones, 25 (44,6%) hicieron uso de las decisiones de autoridades regulatorias de otras jurisdicciones y 12 (21,4%), no. Para las 19 restantes (33,0%) no fue posible determinar si se hizo uso de las decisiones de autoridades regulatorias de otras jurisdicciones. Los organismos de referencia utilizaron las decisiones de autoridades regulatorias de otras jurisdicciones con menos frecuencia (40% de las autorizaciones con un mecanismo conocido) en comparación con los organismos no usados como referencia (100%). El plazo medio de revisión fue de tan solo 15 días y no difiere significativamente entre las autorizaciones que emplearon decisiones de autoridades regulatorias de otras jurisdicciones y las que no las emplearon. Conclusiones. En este estudio se demostró que, a pesar de que los mecanismos de utilización de las decisiones de autoridades regulatorias de otras jurisdicciones se asocian en muchos casos con autorizaciones rápidas, para estas vacunas los plazos de revisión independiente para la autorización no fueron considerablemente mayores que los de las revisiones que emplearon decisiones de autoridades regulatorias de otras jurisdicciones. También se demostró que para obtener una autorización rápida no se requería la utilización de las decisiones de autoridades regulatorias de otras jurisdicciones. Sin embargo, estos mecanismos proporcionaron autorizaciones rápidas en respuesta a la emergencia por la COVID-19.

RESUMO Objetivos. Mapear a tempestividade e a natureza do uso de decisões regulatórias de outras autoridades (reliance regulatório) para autorização de vacinas contra a COVID-19 na América Latina. Métodos. Em um estudo observacional, foram avaliadas as características de todas as autorizações de vacinas contra COVID-19 na América Latina. Para cada autorização, foi determinado se foram utilizadas decisões de outras autoridades regulatórias para embasar o processo de autorização. Foram comparados subgrupos de autoridades reguladoras nacionais (ARN) de referência (ARNr) e ARN não consideradas de referência. Resultados. Foram identificadas 56 autorizações de 10 vacinas diferentes contra a COVID-19 em 18 países, das quais 25 (44,6%) utilizaram decisões de outras ARN como base para o registro e 12 (21,4%) não. Para as 19 (33,0%) autorizações restantes, não foi possível determinar se decisões de outras ARN foram utilizadas. As ARNr utilizaram decisões de outras autoridades com menos frequência (40% das autorizações com via regulatória conhecida) em comparação com as ARN não consideradas de referência (100%). A mediana do tempo de tramitação foi de apenas 15 dias, sem diferença significativa entre processos nos quais foram utilizadas decisões de outras agências e processos que não as utilizaram. Conclusões. Este estudo demonstrou que, para estas vacinas, apesar de o uso do reliance regulatório estar associado a várias autorizações rápidas, os tempos de tramitação não foram consideravelmente maiores em autorizações independentes do que quando foram utilizadas decisões de outras ARN; o reliance regulatório não foi um pré-requisito para autorização rápida. No entanto, o uso de tais processos viabilizou autorizações rápidas em resposta à emergência de COVID-19.

Regulatory reliance to approve new medicinal products in Latin American and Caribbean countries / Utilización de decisiones de autoridades regulatorias de otras jurisdicciones para aprobar nuevos productos medicinales en países de América Latina y el Caribe / Uso de decisões regulatórias de outras jurisdições para aprovação de novas especialidades farmacêuticas em países da América Latina e Caribe

ABSTRACT Objective. To describe the current status of regulatory reliance in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) by assessing the countries' regulatory frameworks to approve new medicines, and to ascertain, for each country, which foreign regulators are considered as trusted regulatory authorities to rely on. Methods. Websites from LAC regulators were searched to identify the official regulations to approve new drugs. Data collection was carried out in December 2019 and completed in June 2020 for the Caribbean countries. Two independent teams collected information regarding direct recognition or abbreviated processes to approve new drugs and the reference (trusted) regulators defined as such by the corresponding national legislation. Results. Regulatory documents regarding marketing authorization were found in 20 LAC regulators' websites, covering 34 countries. Seven countries do not accept reliance on foreign regulators. Thirteen regulatory authorities (Argentina, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay, and the unique Caribbean Regulatory System for 15 Caribbean States) explicitly accept relying on marketing authorizations issued by the European Medicines Agency, United States Food and Drug Administration, and Health Canada. Ten countries rely also on marketing authorizations from Australia, Japan, and Switzerland. Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Mexico are reference authorities for eight LAC regulators. Conclusions. Regulatory reliance has become a common practice in the LAC region. Thirteen out of 20 regulators directly recognize or abbreviate the marketing authorization process in case of earlier approval by a regulator from another jurisdiction. The regulators most relied upon are the European Medicines Agency, United States Food and Drug Administration, and Health Canada.

RESUMEN Objetivo. Describir el estado actual de la utilización de las decisiones de autoridades regulatorias de otras jurisdicciones en América Latina y el Caribe mediante la evaluación de los marcos regulatorios nacionales para la aprobación de nuevos medicamentos y establecer los organismos regulatorios extranjeros que se consideran autoridades regulatorias confiables para cada país. Métodos. Se realizaron búsquedas en los sitios web de las autoridades regulatorias de América Latina y el Caribe para identificar las regulaciones oficiales para la aprobación de nuevos medicamentos. La recopilación de datos se llevó a cabo en diciembre del 2019 y se completó en junio del 2020 para los países del Caribe. Dos equipos independientes recopilaron información sobre el reconocimiento directo o los procedimientos abreviados para la aprobación de nuevos medicamentos y los autoridades regulatorias de referencia (confiables) así definidos en la legislación nacional correspondiente. Resultados. Se encontraron documentos regulatorios sobre la aprobación de nuevos productos en los sitios web de veinte organismos regulatorios de América Latina y el Caribe, que abarcaban 34 países. Siete países no aceptan la utilización de decisiones de autoridades regulatorias extranjeras. Trece autoridades regulatorias (Argentina, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, México, Panamá, Paraguay, Perú, República Dominicana, Uruguay y el sistema regulador único para quince Estados del Caribe) aceptan de manera explícita confiar las decisiones para aprobación de nuevos medicamentos emitidas por la Agencia Europea de Medicamentos, la Administración de Alimentos y Medicamentos de Estados Unidos y Salud Canadá. Diez países aceptan también utilizar las autorizaciones para la comercialización de Australia, Japón y Suiza. Argentina, Brasil, Chile y México son autoridades de referencia para ocho autoridades regulatorias en la región. Conclusiones. La utilización de las decisiones de autoridades regulatorias de otras jurisdicciones se han convertido en una práctica común en América Latina y el Caribe. Trece de veinte autoridades regulatorias reconocen directamente o abrevian el proceso de aprobación de nuevos medicamentos en caso de que hayan recibido previamente la aprobación por parte de un organismo regulatorio de otra jurisdicción. La Agencia Europea de Medicamentos, la Administración de Alimentos y Medicamentos de Estados Unidos y Salud Canadá son las autoridades regulatorias de otras jurisdicciones en las cuales los reguladores de América Latina y el Caribe confían más.

RESUMO Objetivo. Descrever a prática atual de uso de decisões regulatórias de outras jurisdições na América Latina e no Caribe (ALC) mediante avaliação os marcos regulatórios dos países para aprovação de novos medicamentos e verificar, para cada país, quais entidades reguladoras estrangeiras são consideradas autoridades reguladoras de confiança por cada país. Métodos. Foi realizada uma pesquisa nos sites das autoridades reguladoras da ALC para identificar as regulamentações oficiais para aprovação de novos medicamentos. A coleta de dados foi feita em dezembro de 2019 e concluída em junho de 2020 para os países do Caribe. Dois grupos independentes coletaram informações sobre o reconhecimento direto ou o procedimento abreviado para aprovação de novos medicamentos e as autoridades reguladoras de referência (de confiança) definidas como tal pela respectiva legislação nacional. Resultados. Documentos regulatórios relacionados à aprovação de novos produtos foram obtidos de 20 sites de órgãos reguladores da ALC, abrangendo 34 países. Sete países não admitem o uso de decisões regulatórias de entidades reguladoras externas. Treze autoridades reguladoras (na Argentina, Colômbia, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Equador, Guatemala, México, Panamá, Paraguai, Peru, República Dominicana, Uruguai e o Sistema Regulador do Caribe unificado para 15 Estados caribenhos) admitem explicitamente a admissibilidade de decisões regulatórias para aprovação de novos medicamentos de outras jurisdições, quais sejam: Agência Europeia de Medicamentos (EMA), Agência Reguladora de Alimentos e Medicamentos (FDA) dos EUA e Health Canada. Dez países também aceitam decisões para autorização de comercialização da Austrália, Japão e Suíça. Argentina, Brasil, Chile e México são autoridades de referência para oito agências reguladoras. Conclusões. O uso de decisões regulatórias de outras jurisdições tornou-se prática comum na América Latina e Caribe. Treze das 20 agências reguladoras reconhecem diretamente ou abreviam o procedimento de aprovação de novos medicamentos no caso de tal aprovação já haver sido concedida por uma autoridade reguladora de outra jurisdição. A EMA, a FDA e a Health Canada são as autoridades estrangeiras nas quais as agências reguladoras da América Latina e Caribe mais confiam.

Valor terapéutico y precio de los nuevos fármacos comercializados en Argentina: ¿valen lo que cuestan? / Therapeutic value and price of the new pharmaceuticals commercialized in Argentina: Are they worth what they cost?

RESUMEN En Argentina, los nuevos medicamentos pueden ser autorizados presentando el certificado de aprobación en al menos uno de los 15 países considerados de alta vigilancia sanitaria, sin necesidad de realizar una evaluación propia de eficacia, seguridad o valor terapéutico agregado por el nuevo producto. En este artículo, evaluamos los nuevos medicamentos comercializados en Argentina en el año 2016, utilizando diferentes enfoques: su aprobación por otras agencias reguladoras, demostración de eficacia en ensayos clínicos aleatorizados, tipo de desenlaces estudiados, calificación del valor terapéutico agregado por medio de dos escalas reconocidas y el precio de venta al público. Se concluye que, como reflejo de lo que ocurre en los países desarrollados, los nuevos medicamentos ingresan con precios exorbitantes, pero la mayoría no representa un avance terapéutico significativo. El resultado es un aumento de riesgos para los pacientes y una sobrecarga para los sistemas de financiación públicos y privados.

ABSTRACT In Argentina, new drugs can be authorized by presenting the drug's certificate of approval in at least one of 15 countries considered to have rigorous health surveillance, without needing to carry out a local evaluation of the efficacy, safety or added therapeutic value of the new product. In this article, we evaluate the new drugs commercialized in Argentina in 2016 using different approaches: their approval by other regulatory agencies, the demonstration of their efficacy in randomized clinical trials, types of outcomes studied, rating of their added therapeutic value using two widely recognized scales, and their sale price to the public. It is concluded that, as a reflection of what occurs in developed countries, new drugs enter the market at exorbitant prices, but the majority do not represent a significant therapeutic advancements. The result is increased risks to patients and an overburdening of the public and private funding systems.

Investigación de la eficacia y criterios de aprobación de los tratamientos con medicamentos para pacientes con cáncer: una revisión / Research of effectiveness and approval criteria for treatments with medications for patients with cancer: a review

RESUMEN Los diversos trastornos malignos de los tejidos humanos afectan a una gran proporción de personas de Colombia y el mundo, lo que ha llevado al incremento de los tratamientos farmacológicos para estas enfermedades, sin que se tenga claro el real beneficio para los pacientes que los reciben. Además, se tienen dudas sobre la calidad de la evidencia en la que se basan las instituciones que avalan los tratamientos anti-cáncer con medicamentos, como son la Food and Drug Administration (FDA) y la European Medicines Agency (EMA). Este trabajo tuvo como objetivo conocer cómo se realizan los estudios de eficacia y la forma en que se aprueban los tratamientos con medicamentos que se ofrecen a las personas con cáncer; se realizó una revisión narrativa, que se basó en la formulación de preguntas que guiaron el desarrollo de los temas que se incluyeron en ella. Se hizo la búsqueda de la información en Pubmed de una forma estructurada, no sistemática. Se incluyeron artículos publicados en inglés y español, sin restricción por fecha de publicación.

SUMMARY Several malignant disorders of human tissues affect a large proportion of people in Colombia and worldwide, which has led to an increase in pharmacological treatments for these diseases, without the real benefit being clear to the patients who receive them. Furthermore, there are doubts about the quality of the evidence on which the institutions that support anticancer treatments with medications are based, such as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA). Our objective was to know how efficacy studies are carried out and how treatments with medications offered to people with cancer are approved. A narrative review was carried out, which was based on the formulation of questions that guided the development of the topics that were included. The search strategy was done in PubMed in a structured but non-systematic way. Articles published in english and spanish were included, without restriction by publication date.

Suitability of new drugs registered in Brazil from 2003 to 2013 for pediatric age groups / Adequação às faixas etárias pediátricas de medicamentos novos registrados no Brasil de 2003 a 2013

ABSTRACT Objective To analyze suitability of new drugs registered in Brazil from 2003 to 2013 for pediatric age groups. Methods A descriptive study of drugs with pediatric indication included in a retrospective cohort of new drugs registered in Brazil. The evaluation of drug suitability for the pediatric age group was performed using the following criteria: suitability of dosage form and capacity to deliver the recommended dose. The drugs were considered adequate for the pediatric age groups when they met both criteria. The statistical analysis included calculation of frequencies and proportions. Results Suitability due to the drug capacity to deliver the recommended dose was greater than 80% across all age groups. Regarding suitability of the dosage form, we identified that the older the age group, the greater suitability for pediatric use. Concerning the drugs presented in solid dosage form, we showed that half were classified as inadequate for one or more pediatric age groups to whom they were indicated. The adequacy of drugs to the pediatric age group was 64.3% for preschool children, 66.7% for full-term newborns, 66.7% for premature newborns, and over 70% for other age groups. Conclusion Drugs for children aged under 6 years were less often adequate, considering the dosage form and capacity to provide the recommended dose. The availability and proportional suitability of medicines for pediatric use are greater for older age groups, according to age groups the drug is registered for.

RESUMO Objetivo Analisar a adequação às faixas etárias pediátricas dos medicamentos novos registrados no Brasil no período de 2003 a 2013. Métodos Estudo descritivo dos medicamentos com indicação pediátrica incluídos em uma coorte retrospectiva de medicamentos novos registrados no Brasil. A avaliação da adequação do medicamento à faixa etária pediátrica foi realizada empregando os seguintes critérios: adequação da forma farmacêutica e capacidade de fornecer a dose recomendada. Os medicamentos foram considerados adequados às faixas etárias pediátricas quando preencheram os dois critérios. A análise estatística compreendeu cálculo de frequências e proporções. Resultados A adequação devido à capacidade do medicamento fornecer a dose recomendada foi superior a 80% em todas as faixas etárias. Em relação à adequação da forma farmacêutica, identificou-se que quanto maior a faixa etária, maior a proporção de adequação para uso pediátrico. Em relação aos medicamentos que se apresentavam em formas farmacêuticas sólidas, evidenciou-se que metade foi classificada como inadequada para uma ou mais faixas etárias pediátricas para as quais estavam indicados. A adequação dos medicamentos à faixa etária pediátrica foi 64,3% para pré-escolares, 66,7% para recém-nascidos a termo, 66,7% para recém-nascidos prematuros e superior a 70% para as demais faixas etárias. Conclusão Os medicamentos destinados às crianças menores de 6 anos apresentaram menor frequência de adequação, considerando a forma farmacêutica e a capacidade de fornecer a dose recomendada. A disponibilidade e a proporção de adequação dos medicamentos para uso pediátrico aumentam com a elevação da faixa etária para a qual o medicamento é registrado.

O mercado brasileiro de anticorpos monoclonais utilizados para o tratamento de câncer / The Brazilian market for monoclonal antibodies used in cancer treatment / El mercado brasileño de anticuerpos monoclonales utilizados para el tratamiento de cáncer

Resumo: Os anticorpos monoclonais (mABs) têm sido indicados como tecnologia inovadora para o tratamento de alguns tipos de câncer, por serem capazes de alvejar e matar seletivamente células tumorais. Contudo, os altos custos dessas terapias colocam em questão a sustentabilidade do acesso. Este trabalho teve como objetivo identificar as principais características dos anticorpos monoclonais, destinados ao tratamento de câncer, com registro sanitário ativo, no Brasil, em 2016. Tratou-se de uma análise descritiva retrospectiva a partir de consulta à página de Internet da Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária (Anvisa), em que esses mABs foram caracterizados de acordo com antígeno-alvo, tipo de anticorpo, ano de registro, indicações terapêuticas e empresa detentora do registro. Foram identificados 14 anticorpos com ação em sete antígenos-alvo diferentes. No que diz respeito às indicações clínicas, houve uma maior frequência de linfomas, leucemias, câncer de mama e câncer colorretal. Quanto ao tipo, foram identificados três anticorpos quiméricos, seis humanizados e cinco humanos. A Roche apareceu como a empresa detentora do registro de 6 dos 14 mABs, o que representa 43% dos registros sanitários. Foi possível, a partir desses dados, discutir a ideia de medicamentos me-too no mercado de biológicos, assim como pensar as tensões existentes nesse mercado e a ideia de oligopólio diferenciado. Apesar do desenvolvimento de novos produtos, ainda que para atuar em um mesmo alvo, representar a possibilidade de um incremento competitivo e, com isso, de uma diminuição dos preços praticados pelas empresas torna-se um problema quando é a mesma empresa que lança no mercado novos anticorpos direcionados ao mesmo alvo, sem mudanças relevantes.

Abstract: Monoclonal antibodies (mABs) have been indicated as an innovative technology for the treatment of some types of cancer, since they are capable of targeting and selectively killing tumor cells. However, the high costs of these therapies raise questions as to the sustainability of access. This study aimed to identify the principal characteristics of monoclonal antibodies used in cancer treatment with active marketing authorization in Brazil as of 2016. This was a descriptive retrospective analysis based on consultation of the Brazilian Health Regulatory Agency (Anvisa) website, in which these mABs were characterized according to the target antigen, type of antibody, year of registration, therapeutic indications, and applicant. A total of 14 antibodies were identified with action on seven different target antigens. The most frequent clinical indications were for lymphomas, leukemias, breast cancer, and colorectal cancer. As for type, the study identified three chimeric, six humanized, and five human antibodies. Roche was the applicant in 6 of the 14 mABs, or 43% of the marketing authorization. It was possible to discuss the idea of me-too medicines in the biological market and the idea of a differentiated oligopoly, as well as to think about the tensions in this kind of market. It is expected that the development of new products, although to act on the same biological target, represent the possibility of a competitive increase and, as a result, a decrease in prices practiced by companies. However, this becomes a problem when it is the same pharmaceutical industry that launches on the market new antibodies directed to the same target, with no relevant changes.

Resumen: Los anticuerpos monoclonales (mABs) han sido señalados como una tecnología innovadora para el tratamiento de algunos tipos de cáncer, por ser capaces de apuntar y matar selectivamente células tumorales. No obstante, los altos costes de estas terapias ponen en cuestión la sostenibilidad del acceso. El objetivo de este trabajo fue identificar las principales características de los anticuerpos monoclonales, destinados al tratamiento de cáncer, con registro sanitario activo, en Brasil, en 2016. Se trató de un análisis descriptivo retrospectivo, a partir de la consulta a la página web de la Agencia Nacional de Vigilancia Sanitaria (Anvisa), donde esos mABs se caracterizaron conforme el antígeno objetivo, tipo de anticuerpo, año de registro, indicaciones terapéuticas y empresa detentora de su registro. Se identificaron 14 anticuerpos con acción en siete antígenos-objetivo diferentes. En lo referente a las indicaciones clínicas, hubo una mayor frecuencia de linfomas, leucemias, cáncer de mama y cáncer colorrectal. En cuanto al tipo, se identificaron tres anticuerpos quiméricos, seis humanizados y cinco humanos. Roche apareció como la empresa detentora del registro de 6 de los 14 mABS, lo que representa un 43% de los registros sanitarios. Fue posible, a partir de esos datos, discutir la idea de medicamentos me-too en el mercado de biológicos, así como reflexionar sobre las tensiones existentes en ese mercado y la idea de oligopolio diferenciado. El desarrollo de nuevos productos, aunque sean para actuar en un mismo objetivo, representa la posibilidad de un incremento competitivo y, con ello, de una disminución de los precios practicados por las empresas. Esto se convierte en un problema cuando es la misma empresa que lanza en el mercado nuevos anticuerpos, dirigidos al mismo objetivo, sin cambios relevantes.

A New Model of Multi-Terminal and Interractive Drug Approval Based on WeChat Platform / 医学信息学杂志

Taking Zhenjiang First Peopls's Hospital as an example,the paper analyzes the advantage of mulit-terminal and interactive durg approval based on WeChat platform,dilates upon realization method of the mode from the three aspects of logic architecture,physical archtecture and business process and poinst out that the mode is able to realize informatization management of the mixed approval of drugs.

Key points of toxicology research in international registration of botanical drugs / 中国药理学与毒理学杂志

In recent years, traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) has made great progress in the process of internationalization,but the share of TCM is still insignificant in the international market.One of the reasons is that it is difficult to submit the documents in accordance with the drug registration reguirements of Europe and America. In this paper,the requirements of the international drug registration of botanical drugs are briefly introduced,involving the status of botanical drug international registration, the provisions of toxicological studies on botanical drug registration requirements in the United States and Europe, the difference in toxicological research between China and the United States, and the focus of the international registration of toxicological research.

Comparison of Approval Process for Nonprescription Drugs in Different Countries

Nonprescription drugs have become increasingly important in Korean healthcare. By leveraging lower-cost drugs and reducing expenditure associated with fewer physician visits, the nonprescription segment can deliver tremendous value to individual consumers and the Korean healthcare system. Many countries have provided simpler and more rapid routes to market entry for qualifying nonprescription drug products, using the established data on drug safety and efficacy, as well as public and professional opinion. In US, the FDA waived the pre-approval process for over-the-counter (OTC) drugs marketed through the OTC Monograph Process. In Australia and Canada, different OTC product application levels are defined, with a reduced level of assessment required when the risks to consumers are considered low. Japan established a new OTC evaluation system in 2014 to facilitate the Rx-to-OTC switch process. The legislative framework for medicinal products in the European Union allows for drugs to be approved with reference to appropriate bibliographic data for old active substances with well-established uses. Through a comparison of the regulatory framework and the requirements for nonprescription approval process in different countries, several ways to improve regulatory practice for the evaluation of nonprescription drugs in Korea have been suggested.

Overviews and analysis of the U.S. FDA′s new approvals in the 2016 second half year / 国际药学研究杂志

In the second half of 2016,the U.S. Food and Drug Administration(FDA)approved 7 new molecular entities and 3 new Biologic License Application(BLA), the lowest number in recent years. According to the prescription information for profes-sionals,this article introduced the description,mechanism of action and clinical studies and briefly describes the boxed warning,indi-cations and usage,dosage and administration,dosage form and strength,contraindications,warning and precautions,adverse reac-tions,drug interaction and the use in the special population. In addition,the first and critical events in the history of new drug develop-ment and reaserch were emphasized.

Pharmaceutical lobbying in Brazil: a missing topic in the public health research agenda

ABSTRACT In the US, where registration of lobbyists is mandatory, the pharmaceutical industry and private health-care providers spend huge amounts of money seeking to influence health policies and government decisions. In Brazil, where lobbying lacks transparency, there is virtually no data on drug industry expenditure to persuade legislators and government officials of their viewpoints and to influence decision-making according to commercial interests. Since 1990, however, the Associação da Indústria Farmacêutica de Pesquisa (Interfarma - Pharmaceutical Research Industry Association), Brazilian counterpart of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), main lobbying organization of the US pharmaceutical industry, has played a major role in the advocacy of interests of major drug companies. The main goals of Interfarma lobbying activities are: shortening the average time taken by the Brazilian regulatory agency (ANVISA) to approve marketing authorization for a new drug; making the criteria for incorporation of new drugs into SUS (Brazilian Unified Health System) more flexible and speeding up technology incorporation; changing the Country's ethical clearance system and the ethical requirements for clinical trials to meet the need of the innovative drug industry, and establishing a National Policy for Rare Diseases that allows a prompt incorporation of orphan drugs into SUS. Although lobbying affects community health and well-being, this topic is not in the public health research agenda. The impacts of pharmaceutical lobbying on health policies and health-care costs are of great importance for SUS and deserve to be investigated.

Overviews and analysis of the U.S. FDA′s new approvals in the 2015 second half year / 国际药学研究杂志

In the second half year of 2015, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration(FDA)approved 20 new molecular enti-ties single or compounds and 15 biologics license applications, a total of 35 which record number of approved innovative drugs. Ac-cording to the prescription information for professionals, this article briefly describes the description, mechanism of action and clinical studies, the box warning, indications and usage, dosage and administration, dosage form and strength, contraindications, warning and precautions, adverse reactions, drug interaction and use in special population of these new drugs. In addition, the first and criti-cal events in the history of new drug development and reaserch are emphasized.

Overviews and analysis of the U.S. FDA’ s new approvals in the first half year of 2016 / 国际药学研究杂志

In the first half year of 2016, the U.S. food and drug administration (FDA) approved 9 new molecular entities and 8 new biologic license applications. According to the prescription information for professionals, this article introduces the description, mechanism of action and clinical studies; briefly describes the box warning, indications and usage, dosage and administration, dosage form and strength, contraindications, warning and precautions, adverse reactions, drug interaction and use in special population of these new drugs. In addition, the first and critical events in the history of new drug development and reaserch are emphasized.

New drugs approved by the U.S. FDA (2007-2016): A review / 国际药学研究杂志

The introductions of the new drugs approved by the U.S. FDA have been published in the“ Journal of International Pharmaceutical Research ”for ten years. However, new problems might emerge with the increasing clinical practice and the cumulative number of patients being treated, such as the indications and purposes change, supplement of the modified efficacy, clinical data and the important new indications, constant improvement of the dosage, form and mode of administration, and the emergence of new, serious and even fatal adverse reactions urge the supplements of contraindications, warnings and precautions, or even the black box warnings. In brief, 6 entries of the introductions all may be modified, supplemented or canceled. More importantly, ten years of general analyses also find some prominent events, such as the amount of new molecular entity (NME)and new biological products come to an obvious peak in 2015. With regard to this, this paper reviewed the prominent historical events happened in the ten years in order to provide guidance and reference for new drug research and development.

Overviews and analysis of the U.S. FDA′s new approvals in the first half year of 2016 / 国际药学研究杂志

In the first half year of 2016,the U.S. food and drug administration(FDA)approved 9 new molecular entities and 8 new biologic license applications. According to the prescription information for professionals,this article introduces the description, mechanism of action and clinical studies;briefly describes the box warning,indications and usage,dosage and administration,dos?age form and strength,contraindications,warning and precautions,adverse reactions,drug interaction and use in special population of these new drugs. In addition,the first and critical events in the history of new drug development and reaserch are emphasized.

Overviews and analysis of the U.S. FDA′s new approvals in the 2015 second half year / 国际药学研究杂志

In the second half year of 2015,the U.S. Food and Drug Administration(FDA)approved 20 new molecular enti?ties single or compounds and 15 biologics license applications,a total of 35 which record number of approved innovative drugs. Ac?cording to the prescription information for professionals,this article briefly describes the description,mechanism of action and clinical studies,the box warning,indications and usage,dosage and administration,dosage form and strength,contraindications,warning and precautions,adverse reactions,drug interaction and use in special population of these new drugs. In addition,the first and criti?cal events in the history of new drug development and reaserch are emphasized.

New drugs approved by the U.S. FDA(2007-2016):a review / 国际药学研究杂志

The introductions of the new drugs approved by the U.S. FDA have been published in the“Journal of International Pharmaceutical Research”for ten years. However,new problems might emerge with the increasing clinical practice and the cumulative number of patients being treated,such as the indications and purposes change,supplement of the modified efficacy,clinical data and the important new indications,constant improvement of the dosage,form and mode of administration,and the emergence of new,seri?ous and even fatal adverse reactions urge the supplements of contraindications,warnings and precautions,or even the black box warn?ings. In brief,6 entries of the introductions all may be modified,supplemented or canceled. More importantly,ten years of general analyses also find some prominent events,such as the amount of new molecular entity(NME)and new biological products come to an obvious peak in 2015. With regard to this,this paper reviewed the prominent historical events happened in the ten years in order to provide guidance and reference for new drug research and development.