FarFaR - Pharmacy Repository
University of Belgrade, Faculty of Pharmacy
    • English
    • Српски
    • Српски (Serbia)
  • English 
    • English
    • Serbian (Cyrillic)
    • Serbian (Latin)
  • Login
View Item 
  •   FarFaR
  • Pharmacy
  • Radovi istraživača / Researchers’ publications
  • View Item
  •   FarFaR
  • Pharmacy
  • Radovi istraživača / Researchers’ publications
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

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

Thumbnail
2012
1687.pdf (2.271Mb)
Authors
Ilić, Nina
Savić, Snežana
Siegel, Evan
Atkinson, Kerry
Tasić, Ljiljana
Article (Published version)
Metadata
Show full item record
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. STEM CELLS TRANSLATIONAL MEDICINE 2012;1:898-908

Keywords:
Cellular therapy / Clinical translation / Clinical trials / Ethics
Source:
Stress-The International Journal on the Biology of Stress, 2012, 1, 12, 898-908
Publisher:
  • Alphamed Press, Durham

DOI: 10.5966/sctm.2012-0037

ISSN: 2157-6564

PubMed: 23283551

WoS: 000312823200005

Scopus: 2-s2.0-84872922024
[ Google Scholar ]
19
16
URI
https://farfar.pharmacy.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/1689
Collections
  • Radovi istraživača / Researchers’ publications
Institution/Community
Pharmacy
TY  - JOUR
AU  - Ilić, Nina
AU  - Savić, Snežana
AU  - Siegel, Evan
AU  - Atkinson, Kerry
AU  - Tasić, Ljiljana
PY  - 2012
UR  - https://farfar.pharmacy.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/1689
AB  - 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. STEM CELLS TRANSLATIONAL MEDICINE 2012;1:898-908
PB  - Alphamed Press, Durham
T2  - Stress-The International Journal on the Biology of Stress
T1  - Examination of the Regulatory Frameworks Applicable to Biologic Drugs (Including Stem Cells and Their Progeny) in Europe, the US, and Australia: Part I-A Method of Manual Documentary Analysis
VL  - 1
IS  - 12
SP  - 898
EP  - 908
DO  - 10.5966/sctm.2012-0037
ER  - 
@article{
author = "Ilić, Nina and Savić, Snežana and Siegel, Evan and Atkinson, Kerry and Tasić, Ljiljana",
year = "2012",
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. STEM CELLS TRANSLATIONAL MEDICINE 2012;1:898-908",
publisher = "Alphamed Press, Durham",
journal = "Stress-The International Journal on the Biology of Stress",
title = "Examination of the Regulatory Frameworks Applicable to Biologic Drugs (Including Stem Cells and Their Progeny) in Europe, the US, and Australia: Part I-A Method of Manual Documentary Analysis",
volume = "1",
number = "12",
pages = "898-908",
doi = "10.5966/sctm.2012-0037"
}
Ilić, N., Savić, S., Siegel, E., Atkinson, K.,& Tasić, L.. (2012). Examination of the Regulatory Frameworks Applicable to Biologic Drugs (Including Stem Cells and Their Progeny) in Europe, the US, and Australia: Part I-A Method of Manual Documentary Analysis. in Stress-The International Journal on the Biology of Stress
Alphamed Press, Durham., 1(12), 898-908.
https://doi.org/10.5966/sctm.2012-0037
Ilić N, Savić S, Siegel E, Atkinson K, Tasić L. Examination of the Regulatory Frameworks Applicable to Biologic Drugs (Including Stem Cells and Their Progeny) in Europe, the US, and Australia: Part I-A Method of Manual Documentary Analysis. in Stress-The International Journal on the Biology of Stress. 2012;1(12):898-908.
doi:10.5966/sctm.2012-0037 .
Ilić, Nina, Savić, Snežana, Siegel, Evan, Atkinson, Kerry, Tasić, Ljiljana, "Examination of the Regulatory Frameworks Applicable to Biologic Drugs (Including Stem Cells and Their Progeny) in Europe, the US, and Australia: Part I-A Method of Manual Documentary Analysis" in Stress-The International Journal on the Biology of Stress, 1, no. 12 (2012):898-908,
https://doi.org/10.5966/sctm.2012-0037 . .

DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
About FarFaR - Pharmacy Repository | Send Feedback

OpenAIRERCUB
 

 

All of DSpaceCommunitiesAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis institutionAuthorsTitlesSubjects

Statistics

View Usage Statistics

DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
About FarFaR - Pharmacy Repository | Send Feedback

OpenAIRERCUB