Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 12.273
Filter
1.
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf ; 33(6): e5793, 2024 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38783553

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of rescheduling hydrocodone combination products (HCPs) from schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act to the more restrictive schedule II on unintentional pediatric exposures (≤5 years old). METHODS: Using U.S. data on outpatient retail pharmacy dispensing, emergency department (ED) visits, and poison center (PC) exposure cases, we assessed trends in prescriptions dispensed and unintentional pediatric exposure cases involving hydrocodone (rescheduled from III to II) compared to oxycodone (schedule II) and codeine (schedule III for combination products) using descriptive and interrupted time-series (ITS) analyses during the 16 quarters before and after the October 2014 rescheduling of HCPs. RESULTS: Dispensing of hydrocodone products was declining before rescheduling but declined more steeply post-rescheduling. In ITS analyses, both hydrocodone and oxycodone had significant slope decreases in PC case rates in the post versus pre-period that was larger for hydrocodone, while codeine had a small but significant slope increase in PC case rates. An estimated 4202 ED visits for pediatric hydrocodone exposures occurred in the pre-period and 2090 visits occurred in the post-period, a significant decrease of 50.3%. Oxycodone exposures showed no significant decrease. CONCLUSIONS: Pediatric hydrocodone unintentional exposure ED visits and PC cases decreased after HCP rescheduling more than would be expected had the pre-rescheduling trend continued; the acceleration in the decrease in hydrocodone PC cases was partially offset by a slowing in the decrease in codeine-involved cases. The trend changes were likely due to multiple factors, including changes in dispensing that followed the rescheduling. Unintentional pediatric medication exposures and poisonings remain a public health concern requiring ongoing, multifaceted mitigation efforts.


Subject(s)
Analgesics, Opioid , Codeine , Drug and Narcotic Control , Emergency Service, Hospital , Hydrocodone , Oxycodone , Poison Control Centers , Humans , Analgesics, Opioid/adverse effects , Child, Preschool , Oxycodone/adverse effects , Poison Control Centers/statistics & numerical data , United States/epidemiology , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Drug and Narcotic Control/legislation & jurisprudence , Infant , Interrupted Time Series Analysis , Child , Drug Combinations
3.
Health Res Policy Syst ; 22(1): 60, 2024 May 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38783308

ABSTRACT

In January 2023, the province of British Columbia (BC) decriminalized the possession of certain illegal drugs for personal use. The province's primary intent was to reduce the stigma associated with drug use, as well as barriers for people who use drugs (PWUD) to access treatment and supports. However, less than ten months into the decriminalization policy, due to growing concerns about public safety voiced by municipal governments and communities, the provincial government made amendments to the policy to ban the public consumption of illicit drugs in additional locations, and subsequently introduced additional legislation, Bill 34, aimed at regulating public consumption of drugs in public spaces. Some communities have also implemented local bylaws similarly regulating public drug use. Bill 34 and local bylaws may serve as tools to promote community health and safety and minimize direct and indirect harms associated with public drug use. However, such legislation may re-criminalize PWUD and reinforce negative perceptions surrounding drug use, especially if these policies are not paired with strategies to expand the availability and accessibility of critical harm reduction and housing services. Without ample access to these services, limitations on public drug use can potentially displace individuals to areas where they are more likely to use alone, further exposing them to substance use-related harms, and undermining the goals of decriminalization. The potential effects of these restrictions may also disproportionately impact marginalized populations. As of April 2024, Bill 34 remains on hold. Moving forward, it will be important to monitor this bill, as well as other public consumption bylaws and legislation, and their impact on BC's overall decriminalization initiative. Decision-makers are urged to increase engagement with PWUD and relevant stakeholders in the design and implementation of policies pertaining to public consumption to ensure that they effectively address the evolving needs and realities of PWUD, and align with decriminalization goals.


Subject(s)
Harm Reduction , Illicit Drugs , Substance-Related Disorders , Humans , British Columbia , Illicit Drugs/legislation & jurisprudence , Public Health , Public Policy , Drug Users/legislation & jurisprudence , Health Policy , Drug and Narcotic Control/legislation & jurisprudence , Recreational Drug Use
4.
J Law Med ; 31(1): 201-209, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38761397

ABSTRACT

Illegal trafficking of narcotics and problems associated with illegal substance abuse have attracted great deal of attention over the years. However, there are concerns about how to solve this problem while still respecting individual rights. In general terms, it has been alleged by numerous international observers that in many instances human rights have not been fully respected or observed in the fight against illicit drugs. When it comes to Shari'a law, the fundamental premise is that narcotics abuse and trafficking is clearly in violation of Islamic principles. This article highlights the importance of adopting a human rights-based approach to policies regarding narcotics and discusses the potential conflict and the State's obligation to enforce laws which protect their citizens with individual citizen's rights. It focuses on Islamic laws and takes Saudi Arabia as an example given the fact that the Saudi Arabia bases its constitution on Sharia.


Subject(s)
Drug and Narcotic Control , Human Rights , Islam , Humans , Human Rights/legislation & jurisprudence , Saudi Arabia , Drug and Narcotic Control/legislation & jurisprudence , Drug Trafficking/legislation & jurisprudence
5.
Int J Drug Policy ; 127: 104425, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38615484

ABSTRACT

In this paper, we explore how the social harm approach can be adapted within drug policy scholarship. Since the mid-2000s, a group of critical criminologists have moved beyond the concept of crime and criminology, towards the study of social harm. This turn proceeds decades of research that highlights the inequities within the criminal legal system, the formation of laws that protect the privileged and punish the disadvantaged, and the systemic challenge of the effectiveness of retribution and punishment at addressing harm in the community. The purpose of this paper is to first identify parallels between the social harm approach and critical drug scholarship, and second to advocate for the adoption of a social harm lens in drug policy scholarship. In the paper, we draw out the similarities between social harm and drug policy literatures, as well as outline what the study of social harm can bring to an analysis of drug policy. This includes a discussion on the ontology of drug crime, the myth of drug crime and the ineffective use of the crime control system in response to drug use. The paper then discusses how these conversations in critical criminology and critical drugs scholarship can be brought together to inform future drug policy research. This reflection details the link between social harm and the impingement of human flourishing, explores the role of decolonizing drug policy, advocates for the centralization of lived experience within the research process and outlines how this might align with harm reduction approaches. We conclude by arguing that the social harm approach challenges the idea that neutrality is the goal in drug policy and explicitly seeks to expand new avenues in activist research and social justice approaches to policymaking.


Subject(s)
Crime , Substance-Related Disorders , Humans , Substance-Related Disorders/prevention & control , Drug and Narcotic Control/legislation & jurisprudence , Public Policy , Harm Reduction , Policy Making , Criminology
7.
Int J Drug Policy ; 127: 104393, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38520960

ABSTRACT

Based on a survey (n = 249) and qualitative interviews (n = 38) with marginalized people who use drugs (PWUDs) in Copenhagen, Denmark, we investigate the experiences of this group with the police in a context where drug possession had been depenalized in and around drug consumption rooms (DCRs). Our findings point to positive experiences with the police, especially with the local community police in the depenalization zone, who refrained from drug law enforcement and practiced 'harm reduction policing.' However, marginalized PWUDs also reported that they were still targeted for drug possession by other sections of the police despite the depenalization policy. Specifically, the drug squad of the police would continue to confiscate illicit drugs for investigatory purposes to counter organized drug crime, as well as continue to target user-dealers who were not formally included in the depenalization policy. The findings illustrate how marginalized PWUDs still found themselves in a precarious legal situation without any legal rights to possess the drugs that they were dependent on, even though possession of drugs had been depenalized in and around DCRs.


Subject(s)
Drug Users , Harm Reduction , Law Enforcement , Police , Humans , Denmark , Male , Female , Adult , Drug Users/psychology , Middle Aged , Substance-Related Disorders , Illicit Drugs , Social Marginalization , Surveys and Questionnaires , Drug and Narcotic Control/legislation & jurisprudence
8.
Int J Drug Policy ; 127: 104389, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38522176

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Opioid overdose mortality in the US has exceeded one million deaths over the last two decades. A regulated opioid supply may help prevent future overdose deaths by reducing exposure to the unregulated opioid supply. We examined the acceptability, delivery model preference, and anticipated effectiveness of different regulated opioid models among people in the Seattle area who inject opioids. METHODS: We enrolled people who inject drugs in the 2022 Seattle-area National HIV Behavior Surveillance (NHBS) survey. Participants were recruited between July and December 2022 using respondent-driven sampling. Participants who reported injecting opioids (N = 453) were asked whether regulated opioids would be acceptable, their preferred model of receiving regulated opioids, and the anticipated change in individual overdose risk from accessing a regulated opioid supply. RESULTS: In total, 369 (81 %) participants who injected opioids reported that a regulated opioid supply would be acceptable to them. Of the 369 who found a regulated opioid supply to be acceptable, the plurality preferred a take-home model where drugs are prescribed (35 %), followed closely by a dispensary model that required no prescription (28 %), and a prescribed model where drugs need to be consumed on site (13 %), a model where no prescription is required and drugs can be accessed in a community setting with a one-time upfront payment was the least preferred model (5 %). Most participants (69 %) indicated that receiving a regulated opioid supply would be "a lot less risky" than their current supply, 20 % said, "a little less risky", 10 % said no difference, and 1 % said a little or a lot more risky. CONCLUSION: A regulated opioid supply would be acceptable to most participants, and participants reported it would greatly reduce their risk of overdose. As overdose deaths continue to increase in Washington state pragmatic and effective solutions that reduce exposure to unregulated drugs are needed.


Subject(s)
Analgesics, Opioid , Opioid-Related Disorders , Substance Abuse, Intravenous , Humans , Male , Adult , Female , Analgesics, Opioid/supply & distribution , Analgesics, Opioid/administration & dosage , Analgesics, Opioid/poisoning , Substance Abuse, Intravenous/epidemiology , Washington , Middle Aged , Opioid-Related Disorders/epidemiology , Opioid-Related Disorders/prevention & control , Opiate Overdose/prevention & control , Opiate Overdose/epidemiology , Young Adult , Drug Overdose/prevention & control , Drug Overdose/mortality , Drug and Narcotic Control/legislation & jurisprudence
9.
Int J Drug Policy ; 127: 104395, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38531189

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In Chile, Laws 19366 and 20000, implemented in 1995 and 2005 respectively, regulated and sanctioned cannabis' personal use, cultivation and trafficking. METHODS: We use thirteen biannual cross-sectional national surveys data from 1994 to 2018 to examine the effect of Laws 19366 and 20000-using the rate of individuals incarcerated per 100000 population due to drug-related crimes as proxy-on the age of onset of cannabis use over time. We estimate the effect of these policies using a mixed proportional hazards framework that models the transition to first cannabis use in 47,832 individuals aged 12-21. RESULTS: Overall, changes in these laws did not affect the transition to first cannabis use. However, increases in the rate of individuals incarcerated were associated with decreases on the age of onset of cannabis use in females and individuals living in affluent neighborhoods or in specific regions. CONCLUSION: We find no evidence of cannabis policy changes affecting the age of onset of cannabis use across all individuals aged 12-21. Policy effects associated with decreases in cannabis onset age in females and individuals from affluent neighborhoods or specific regions can be explained by using theoretical frames that recognize specific dynamics of cannabis supply and demand.


Subject(s)
Age of Onset , Humans , Chile/epidemiology , Female , Male , Adolescent , Young Adult , Child , Cross-Sectional Studies , Public Policy , Cannabis , Legislation, Drug , Marijuana Use/legislation & jurisprudence , Marijuana Use/epidemiology , Drug and Narcotic Control/legislation & jurisprudence , Marijuana Smoking/legislation & jurisprudence , Marijuana Smoking/epidemiology , Sex Factors
10.
Int J Drug Policy ; 126: 104368, 2024 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38452423

ABSTRACT

There have been several recent commentaries which have highlighted the relevance of the postcolonial perspective to drug prohibition and called for the decolonisation of drug policy (Daniels et al., 2021; Hillier, Winkler & Lavallée, 2020; Lasco, 2022; Mills, 2019). While these are significant interventions in the field, sparse drugs scholarship has engaged more directly with well-developed literature and concepts from Critical Indigenous Studies (Moreton-Robinson, 2016) and Indigenous Standpoint Theory (Moreton-Robinson, 2013; Nakata, 2007) and reflected on its applicability to the drug and alcohol field. In contrast to the postcolonial perspective, which understands colonisation as a historical event with contemporary impacts, Indigenous scholarship conceptualises colonisation as an active and ongoing part of how the settler-state continues to impose itself. From this vantage point I explore coloniality as a system of power and reflect on the way prohibition acts as a key arm of the settler-colonial state. The paper explores the way concepts like vulnerability, marginality, overrepresentation, disproportionality and addiction involve colonial violence, knowledge practices and narratives which are central to the way coloniality is maintained and continues to assert itself in contemporary settler societies.


Subject(s)
Colonialism , Substance-Related Disorders , Humans , Drug and Narcotic Control/legislation & jurisprudence , Indigenous Peoples
11.
Int J Drug Policy ; 126: 104381, 2024 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38457960

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Until the end of 2022, a special registration, known as the X-waiver, was required to prescribe buprenorphine in the US. Before its removal, US federal regulations trialed an X-waiver exemption, initiated on April 28, 2021, which permitted buprenorphine prescribing for up to 30 patients without additional training. We aimed to understand if these regulatory changes impacted buprenorphine dispensing. METHODS: We conducted an interrupted time series analysis to understand changes in buprenorphine dispensing during the 26 weeks after the X-waiver exemption compared to the expected baseline trend established in the 26 weeks before using the IQVIA Longitudinal Prescription claims database. The primary outcome was number of new buprenorphine prescribers nationwide (defined as no prior buprenorphine prescription dispensed in the last 26 weeks). Segmented regression estimated relative changes in buprenorphine dispensing at 1, 13, and 26 weeks post-X-waiver change. RESULTS: A total of 15,517,525 prescriptions filled for 1,328,172 patients (43.4 % female) ordered by 62,312 providers were included for analysis. At 26 weeks post-X-waiver change, there was no change in the number of new prescribers compared to the expected baseline trend (-2.7 % [95 % CI:-8.3,2.9]). The number of new (15.2 % [4.6,25.8]) and existing (1.7 % [0.9,2.4]) patients and patients per prescriber (4.3 % [3,5.6]) increased. Buprenorphine prescriptions reimbursed by Medicaid increased (7.5 % [6.6,8.4]) while commercial fills decreased (-3.4 % [-5.3,-1.5]). CONCLUSIONS: The number of new prescribers did not increase six months post-X-waiver exemption while new patients continued to enter treatment at higher-than-expected rates. These findings suggest that additional interventions beyond the recent X-waiver removal may be needed to increase access to buprenorphine.


Subject(s)
Buprenorphine , Interrupted Time Series Analysis , Opiate Substitution Treatment , Opioid-Related Disorders , Buprenorphine/therapeutic use , Buprenorphine/administration & dosage , Humans , Female , Male , United States , Opiate Substitution Treatment/statistics & numerical data , Opioid-Related Disorders/drug therapy , Drug Prescriptions/statistics & numerical data , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Narcotic Antagonists/therapeutic use , Narcotic Antagonists/administration & dosage , Adult , Drug and Narcotic Control/legislation & jurisprudence , Databases, Factual , Analgesics, Opioid/therapeutic use , Analgesics, Opioid/administration & dosage
12.
Health Policy ; 142: 105027, 2024 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38452575

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The appropriate use of medicines has long been recognized as a fundamental component of medicine policies. We aimed to extract lessons from published research on how policy contexts and mechanisms can affect the outcomes of national- or health-system level interventions to promote appropriate medicine use (defined as an increase in underutilized medications or decrease in inappropriate medication use). METHODS: We conducted a rapid realist review of published evidence concerning system-level policies to promote the appropriate use of medicines in high-income countries with universal prescription drug coverage. We searched MEDLINE and Embase to identify relevant publications. We used a realist evaluation framework to identify contexts, mechanisms, and outcomes for each intervention and to hypothesize which policy contexts and mechanisms supported successful outcomes in terms of relative changes in the prevalence of use of the specific medication classes targeted. RESULTS: From 1,318 identified studies, 18 met our inclusion criteria. 13 distinct policies were identified. Three main policy-related factors underpinned successful interventions: involving providers and patients through program interventions; central coordination through national agencies dedicated to medicine policies; and the establishment of an explicit and integrated national medicine policy strategy. CONCLUSION: Policymakers can improve coordination of national pharmaceutical policies to reduce harms from inappropriate medicines use, thus improving health outcomes through cost-effective programs.


Subject(s)
Drug and Narcotic Control , Policy , Humans , Developed Countries
13.
BMC Health Serv Res ; 24(1): 111, 2024 Jan 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38245720

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted an urgent need for harmonised requirements for the regulation of medicines. To fully implement harmonised medicines regulations across Africa, common technical standards of medicine regulations are needed. One such technical standard is the labelling of medicines on outer packaging. In this study, we compared outer packaging labelling requirements and transition terms for harmonization for countries in the Southern African Development Community (SADC) region. METHODS: Data on legislation and/or regulatory guidelines for medicine outer packaging labelling from National Medicines Regulatory Authorities (NMRAs) were obtained for countries in the SADC region (n = 16) by February 2023. A detailed comparative content analysis was conducted to determine alignment with the requirements of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) harmonised labelling guidelines to assess readiness levels of each country to transition to the SADC harmonised labelling guideline for outer packaging of medicines. RESULTS: Content analysis showed at least 11 out of 16 countries require national legal reform to transition to the SADC harmonised labelling guideline. In all cases where countries specified labelling requirements for outer packaging of medicines, these were stipulated in national medicines legislation. CONCLUSION: Even though there is a high level of alignment across the countries in terms of national labelling requirements, most countries in the SADC region would still require national legislative reform to transition to regional harmonised labelling requirements and then ultimately to continental requirements of the African Medicines Agency (AMA).


Subject(s)
Drug Packaging , Pandemics , Humans , Africa South of the Sahara , Drug and Narcotic Control
14.
JAMA Health Forum ; 5(1): e234819, 2024 Jan 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38214918

ABSTRACT

This Viewpoint discusses the importance of the Drug Supply Chain Security Act and the need for pharmaceutical supply chain safeguards.


Subject(s)
Commerce , Pharmaceutical Preparations , Pharmaceutical Preparations/supply & distribution , Drug and Narcotic Control
15.
Article in German | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38214723

ABSTRACT

Drug regulation is a system to support and protect public health. Drugs with market access must be effective, safe and of high quality. Therefore, drug regulatory decision-making by the competent authorities is made on a scientific basis. Real-world evidence (RWE) from real-world data (RWD) has so far predominantly been taken into account in a supportive manner in drug regulatory decision-making with regard to drug safety after marketing authorisation. The extensive potential of RWE for regulatory decision-making processes along the entire product life cycle has been increasingly used and further examined in recent years.This article provides an overview of current applications of RWE in drug regulatory decision-making processes. The potentials of RWE along with the hurdles to be addressed are described and examples of current projects on RWE research for drug regulation are given. The work is based on current international literature as well as examples from international and European initiatives and regulatory practice, which aim to support an increased use of RWD/RWE in regulatory decision-making processes. In order to be able to utilise the potential of RWE even more in the future, it is important to make relevant RWD sources more readily available through research projects and initiatives, to further develop evaluative methods and to establish the significance of RWE.


Subject(s)
Decision Making , Drug and Narcotic Control , Germany
16.
Clin Ther ; 46(3): 293-299, 2024 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38228459

ABSTRACT

The regulatory framework of the European Union (EU) offers multiple and valuable options for Scientific Advice (SA). However, at a time of increasing scientific complexity and global competition, navigating the SA landscape may be challenging. Such challenges are related to the technicalities of the framework itself, as well as to fundamental changes in the development of promising therapeutics. This article provides an overview of these challenges and reflects on the ways in which the already available SA options could be consolidated and optimized for building an integrated, easy-to-navigate process. The key elements of the proposal are improved orientation and navigation support, a simplified process of managing parallel interactions with multiple bodies, competitive SA timelines, consistency and harmonization across stakeholders, a strengthened horizon scanning to increase network preparedness, and a mechanism for building an institutional memory. The article builds on ongoing dialogues driven by the European Medicines Agency and the European Medicines Regulatory Network, and contributes the viewpoint of the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries on the ways in which the EU SA framework needs to evolve to provide effective Scientific Dialogue throughout the medicine lifecycle. The article is timely because of the current discussion on the future Scientific Dialogue framework and may inform forthcoming legislative changes in the draft General Pharma Legislation revision and how they are practically implemented.


Subject(s)
Drug Industry , Drug and Narcotic Control , Humans , European Union
17.
Health Commun ; 39(4): 652-665, 2024 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36825849

ABSTRACT

Federal agencies and self-regulatory bodies help to ensure prescription and nonprescription drug promotion contains accurate information; however, false or misleading claims may cause people to have inaccurate perceptions of a drug and inhibit their ability to make informed decisions. We conducted a systematic review assessing evidence from 2012-2021 on how consumers and healthcare providers (HCPs) interpret claims made indirectly or through inference (implied or implicit claims) as well as synthesizing prescription and nonprescription drug advertising claims that have been the subject of regulatory actions from 2017-2021. Our search identified 16 studies from the peer-reviewed literature and 26 letters or case reports issued by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or National Advertising Division (NAD). Results from peer-reviewed studies suggest that implied claims can result in inferences that may not be warranted by the material facts about the drug. Perceptions of a drug's efficacy and, to a lesser extent, risk, are influenced by implied and explicitly false claims in prescription drug promotion. Claims related to implied superiority and overstatement of efficacy were the most prevalent claims flagged for review and examined in the literature. These types of claims were also the subject of many of the compliance actions by the FDA and case reports from the NAD. More research is needed to understand how people interpret varying types of implied claims and the impact of such claims on key outcomes. From a policy standpoint, understanding how people interpret implied claims can inform how the FDA approaches these claims in the marketplace.


Subject(s)
Advertising , Drug and Narcotic Control , Government Agencies , Nonprescription Drugs , Prescription Drugs , United States , Drug and Narcotic Control/legislation & jurisprudence
18.
Clin Transl Sci ; 17(1): e13683, 2024 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37957894

ABSTRACT

Drug regulatory institutions, infrastructures, and systems are becoming increasingly interconnected across national boundaries and increasingly global in outlook. This process is reflected in the broadening and deepening application of the principles and practice of Regulatory Reliance, and parallel initiatives to strengthen the capacities of regulatory institutions in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Although these developments are important and constructive, they have tended to be framed in terms of the transfer of systems, knowledge, and skills from relatively "mature" regulatory agencies in high-income countries (HICs) to less-well-resourced regulatory agencies in LMICs. This framing recognizes and foregrounds the considerable practical challenges that many LMIC regulatory agencies face, but in doing so, also backgrounds and underestimates the significance of the different contextual insights that LMIC health researchers and regulators can bring to the regulatory deliberations of their HIC counterparts. This position paper argues that the systematic pursuit, identification, and sharing of these different contextual insights-a dimension of regulatory science that we term "Regulatory Complementarity"-can augment the current practice and goals of Regulatory Reliance, and further invigorate the emerging global regulatory ecosystem.


Subject(s)
Developing Countries , Drug and Narcotic Control , Humans
19.
Pharmacol Res ; 199: 107045, 2024 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38157999

ABSTRACT

Since the 1980s, medical specialists in Clinical Pharmacology have been playing a crucial role in the development of drug regulation in Spain. In this article we report on the activities carried out and the prospects for development in three very relevant areas from the regulatory perspective: 1) the development of stable public infrastructures to facilitate non-commercial clinical research with medicines, 2) the regulatory aspects of individual access to medicines in special situations, beyond their regular access after marketing approval and funding by the National Health System, and 3) the challenges of development and access to advanced therapies, with special reference to the figure of the hospital exemption.


Subject(s)
Drug and Narcotic Control , Pharmacology, Clinical , Drug Approval
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...