Search

The pharmaceutical industry is one of the most regulated industries in Switzerland. Though the concept of good manufacturing practises (GMP) was implemented for chemical production in the early 1990s, the rules and regulations for our industry are in constant evolution. In this article we will highlight the impact of these changes to the industry using three recent guideline up-dates as examples: the implementation of ICH Q3D 'Guideline for elemental impurities', the EU-GMP Guideline Part III Chapter 'Guideline on setting health based exposure limits for use in risk identification in the manufacture of different medicinal products in shared facilities' from 01. June 2015, and the new guidelines to data integrity such as 'PIC/S 041-1 Good Practices for Data Management and Integrity in regulated GMP/GDP environments'. These examples show how scientific approaches help to modernize the control strategies for our products and increase product quality for a better patient safety. The requirements of data integrity regulations are also of interest to industries and universities not working under GxP requirements as they also support the business to improve data quality (traceability) for patent applications, and reduce risk of data falsification.

Challenges in demonstrating interchangeability and safety, as well as the ongoing evolution of regulations governing biosimilars, have meant that the development of the biosimilars industry has not been, and will not be, a carbon copy of the generics industry. Complexity in the development process reduces the cost advantages for biosimilars that generics offer over originators. There has been a marked difference in the number of biosimilars approved by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and US FDA due to a lack of consensus and the different rates of progress in establishing both law and stable evidence-based regulatory guidelines for biosimilars. In this review, we provide a précis of the history and status of the regulatory regimes in the USA and Europe. Included is an assessment of market and nonmarket factors that may continue to influence the development of the biosimilars industry., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

An analysis of US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved new molecular entities (NMEs) reveals dynamism in terms of new innovation. An assessment of the first patent for each drug shows that the pharmaceutical industry, particularly large, established companies in North America, tend to dominate the field. Over the past 10-15 years, European and Asian organizations have begun to close the gap. A dynamic inventive environment in drug discovery is suggested by the fact that NMEs for biologics or awarded to biotechnology companies often have inventors from the pharmaceutical and academic sectors. Whereas inventors continue to found biotechnology companies at a steady rate, recent trends suggest these inventors more often come from the private sector., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

This paper assesses the current regulatory environment, relevant regulations and guidelines, and their impact on continuous manufacturing. It summarizes current regulatory experience and learning from both review and inspection perspectives. It outlines key regulatory aspects, including continuous manufacturing process description and control strategy in regulatory files, process validation, and key Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) requirements. In addition, the paper identifies regulatory gaps and challenges and proposes a way forward to facilitate implementation., (© 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. and the American Pharmacists Association.)

This article describes the shortage of generic injectable medications in Canada that affected hospitals in 2012. It traces the events leading up to the drug shortage, the causes of the shortage, and the responses by health administrators, pharmacists, and ethicists. The article argues that generic drug shortages are an ethical problem because health care organizations and governments have an obligation to avoid exposing patients to resource scarcity. The article also discusses some options governments could pursue in order to secure the drug supply and thereby fulfill their ethical obligations.

The R&D productivity of pharmaceutical firms has become an increasingly significant concern of industry, regulators, and policymakers. To address an important aspect of R&D performance, public and private data sources were used to estimate clinical phase transition and clinical approval probabilities for the pipelines of the 50 largest pharmaceutical firms (by sales) by 3 firms size groups (top 10 firms, top 11-20 firms, and top 21-50 firms). For self-originated compounds, the clinical approval success rates were 14.3%, 16.4%, and 18.4% for top 10 firms, top 11-20 firms, and top 21-50 firms, respectively. The results showing higher success rates for smaller firms were largely driven by outcomes for the small-molecule drugs. Adjustments for the relatively small differences in therapeutic class distributions across the firm size groups showed that the success rate for small-molecule self-originated drugs was 6% below average for top 10 firms and 17% above average for top 21-50 firms. Although success rates for small firms were higher, this advantage was offset to some degree by lower returns on approved drugs, suggesting different strategic objectives with regard to risk and reward by firm size.

Biotechnology derived medicinal products are presently the best characterized biologicals with considerable production and clinical experience, and have revolutionized the treatment of some of the most difficult-to-treat diseases, prolonging and improving the quality of life and patient care. They are also currently one of the fastest growing segments of the pharmaceutical industry market. The critical challenge that the biopharmaceutical industry is facing is the expiry of patents for the first generation of biopharmaceuticals, mainly recombinant DNA derived products, such as interferons, growth hormone and erythropoetin. The question that immediately arose was how should such copies of the originator products be licensed, bearing in mind that they are highly complex biological molecules produced by equally complex biological production processes with their inherent problem of biological variability. Copying biologicals is much more complex than copying small molecules and the critical issue was how to handle the licensing of products if relying in part on data from an innovator product. Since 2004 there has been considerable international consultation on how to deal with biosimilars and biological copy products. This has led to a better understanding of the challenges in the regulatory evaluation of the quality, safety and efficacy of "biosimilars", to the exchange of information between regulators, as well as to the identification of key issues. The aim of this article is to provide a brief overview of the scientific and regulatory challenges faced in developing and evaluating similar biotherapeutic products for global use. It is intended as an introduction to the series of articles in this special issue of Biologicals devoted to similar biotherapeutic products., (Copyright © 2011. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Ethnopharmacological Relevance: Herbal drugs are gaining worldwide prominence due to their distinct advantages. Developing countries have started exploring the ethnopharmacological approach of drug discovery and have begun to file patents on herbal drugs. The expansion of R&D in Indian herbal research organizations and presence of manufacturing units at non-Indian sites is an indication of the capability to develop new products and processes. The present study attempts to identify innovations in the Indian herbal drug sector by analyzing the patenting trends in India, US and EU., Methodology: Based on key word and IPC based search at the IPO, USPTO, Esp@cenet and WIPO databases, patent applications and grant in herbal drugs by Indian applicants/assignees was collected for the last ten years (from 1st January 2001 to 31st October 2010). From this collection patents related to human therapeutic use only were selected. Analysis was performed to identify filing trends, major applicants/assignees, disease area and major plant species used for various treatments., Result: There is a gradual increase in patent filing through the years. In India, individual inventors have maximum applications and grants. CSIR, among research organizations and Hindustan Unilever, Avesthagen, Piramal Life Science, Sahajanand Biotech and Indus Biotech among the companies have the maximum granted patents in India, US and EU respectively. Diabetes, cancer and inflammatory disorders are the major areas for patenting in India and abroad. Recent patents are on new herbal formulations for treatment of AIDS, hepatitis, skin disorders and gastrointestinal disorders., Conclusion: A majority of the herbal patents applications and grants in India are with individual inventors. Claim analysis indicates that these patents include novel multi-herb compositions with synergistic action. Indian research organizations are more active than companies in filing for patents. CSIR has maximum numbers of applications not only in India but also in the US and EU. Patents by research organizations and herbal companies are on development of new processes for active compound isolation and standardization of such components in addition to new compositions for therapeutic use. Pharmaceutical companies such as Ranbaxy, Lupin and Panacea Biotec are increasingly patenting on herbal drugs. There is increased patenting activity related to diabetes, cancer, cardiovascular diseases, asthma and arthritis in India and abroad., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The use of genetically modified (GM) plants to synthesize proteins that are subsequently processed, regulated and sold as pharmaceuticals challenges two very different established regulatory frameworks, one concerning GM plants and the other covering the development of biotechnology-derived drugs. Within these regulatory systems, specific regulations and guidelines for plant-made pharmaceuticals (PMPs)--also referred to as plant-derived pharmaceuticals (PDPs)--are still evolving. The products nearing commercial viability will ultimately help to road test and fine-tune these regulations, and might help to reduce regulatory uncertainties. In this review, we summarize the current state of regulations in different countries, discuss recent changes and highlight the need for further regulatory development in this burgeoning, new industry. We also make the case for the harmonization of international regulations.

Regulatory compliance in the development, production and sale of new drugs accounts for the largest single expense in bringing a drug product to market. To justify developmental and regulatory compliance costs, drug innovators turn to the intellectual property (IP) system to provide a means for securing returns on investment. Because the drug regulatory system in most countries operates in isolation of the IP system, one of the greatest challenges facing the pharmaceutical industry is the extent to which IP rights can be managed against an independent drug regulatory system. Many regulatory bodies in developed countries have sought to ensure a compromise between the rights of generic companies and IP owners by including safeguards in the regulatory framework, such as patent linking and data protection; however, these efforts are yet to be applied in some of the biggest potential drug markets in emerging economies.

The charter of medicines promotion recently adopted by France intends to constrain information given by sales representatives to the field of good prescription practices. Over a 11 year period (1994 to end 2004), 362 interdictions of promotional supports have been decided by the director of the French Medicines Agency. This accounts for 0.5% of the about 80 800 promotional supports controlled during this period. A date base shows the representation of the justifications of these interdictions and the predominance of documentation given or showed to the physicians. A challenge for health authorities would be to assess the actual impact of ethical and non ethical promotion.

Pharmaceutical patents are anachronistic holdovers from an era in which modern economic understanding and tax tools were unavailable. Superior mechanisms lie somewhere between a first best pricing solution for the entire economy at one extreme and the current arrangements at the other. We discuss the economics of suggested alternatives and suggest that the intertemporal bounty is the best way to meet the multiple objectives of immediate distribution at marginal cost pricing of newly innovated patented drugs and easily administered, efficient inducement to continued innovation. The intertemporal bounty prevents the expansion of monopoly power resulting from co-pay or -insurance provisions common to modern prescription drug plans.

This paper provides an overview of French pharmaceutical policy between 1980 and 2003, which was dominated by price control and management of the positive list during the 1980s, with new policy instruments being introduced in the 1990s. The development and diffusion of prescription guidelines has been used to promote more appropriate use of medicines, and some measures aimed at developing the generic market have been implemented. In parallel, attempts have been made to set expenditure caps for physicians' prescriptions and for pharmaceutical companies' turnover. This second option seems to be more durable and effective, although its effectiveness in controlling increases in pharmaceutical expenditure remains limited. Pharmaceutical regulation is now more transparent than it used to be, and the monitoring of prescriptions is steadily improving. However, some areas remain problematic, for example over-prescription of certain classes of medicines such as antibiotics and probably psycholeptics.

Objectives: To examine the problem of counterfeit drugs and its effects around the world, to consider the likely directions the problem will take, and to propose options for controlling or mitigating the problem., Data Sources: Recently published clinical literature identified through review of articles abstracted at MEDLINE. Search terms were counterfeiting, counterfeit drugs, substandard drugs, fake drugs, world counterfeiting, and counterfeit pharmaceuticals. Further information was abstracted from an array of informational sources, including magazines such as Business Week, newspapers such as the International Herald Tribune, National Public Radio news reports, pharmaceutical company press releases, and information from the World Health Organization., Study Selection: Multiple reviewers were used to retrieve relevant and current data., Data Extraction: Relevant data were extracted independently by multiple reviewers., Data Synthesis: Traditionally, the problem of counterfeit pharmaceuticals has been limited to developing nations in Asia and Africa. Now, drug counterfeiting is rapidly becoming a worldwide concern, and counterfeit drugs are reaching the U.S. market. This article defines the problem of counterfeit drugs in its many forms and discusses the extent of the problem, with particular attention to the respective rates of counterfeiting across the globe and the origins of counterfeit drugs., Conclusion: Technologic advances have worsened the counterfeit drug problem. Because drug counterfeiting is a worldwide concern, worldwide action is needed to combat the problem.

The Community law now rules any sector of the economy including the Pharmaceutical Industry, which is controlled with a special attention starting from drugs manufacturing up to marketing. After detailing the Community regulations acknowledged by the Italian legislation since the adoption of the first Pharmaceutical Directive in 1965, the Authors examine the Decree Law of february 1997 by which the EEC Directive 93/39 is acknowledged (as amended Directives EEC 65/65,75/318 and 75/319 relating to medicinal products for human use). A special attention is devoted to the several regulations concerning Pharmacovigilance, whose importance is emphasized.

If globally active pharmaceutical companies are to remain competitive, it is essential for them to be able to conduct research and development on an appropriate scale. Generally, their respective domestic market forms their base. For that reason, conditions there should be research-and innovation-friendly. In addition, pharmaceutical research calls for very long-term investment decisions. Companies that become involved in this interaction of profit and loss differ fundamentally from state or public organizations. The ensuing conflict of interest has become increasingly evident in Germany since the end of the 70s. The regulatory environment surrounding the market has changed in all fields, be they fiscal, sociopolitical or in pharmaceutical legislation, into a confusing and incoherent body of regulations. Moreover, part of society is undecided about its attitude towards pharmaceutical progress and the introduction of new technologies. In view of these developments it is high time to change course and help ensure that one of the few remaining competitive sectors in Germany-and one with a promising future-stays in the country.

Within the European Community (EC) countries the national pharmaceutical regulatory systems work with varying degrees of efficiency and scientific sophistication. At the Community level the objective of mutual recognition has failed to be realized. To achieve for one registration application within the EC, timely and simultaneous marketing approvals throughout the member states will require changes to the present regulatory procedures or the single market concept for pharmaceuticals will not be realized. To have the greatest chances for success we should move cautiously, identifying and correcting deficiencies in the present procedures, which are known from experience, rather than abandoning such hard won knowledge for a new system with all its attendant potential unknowns and uncertainty. The free movement of drugs within the Internal European market will be a reality. The question remaining is at what price will it be achieved? It is vital to the European economy and consumer, as well as to the innovative pharmaceutical industry, that Europe does not exchange its present competitive edge in the time to develop and register new drugs for a costly drug lag. The experiment must equally succeed as a torch showing the way forward not only for an enlarging European Community, but also to the ever increasing interest in global harmonization of drug regulation.

Industry chooses phase I partners by evaluating quality versus cost. However, since December 20, 1988, in France only those centers, private or public, authorized by the French authorities can be chosen. However, ability to perform rapidly, reliability and worldwide acceptability of results will be considered in choosing the phase I partner.