Приказ основних података о документу

dc.creatorIlić, Nina
dc.creatorSavić, Snežana
dc.creatorSiegel, Evan
dc.creatorAtkinson, Kerry
dc.creatorTasić, Ljiljana
dc.date.accessioned2019-09-02T11:28:40Z
dc.date.available2019-09-02T11:28:40Z
dc.date.issued2012
dc.identifier.issn2157-6564
dc.identifier.urihttps://farfar.pharmacy.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/1689
dc.description.abstractRecent 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;1:898-908en
dc.publisherAlphamed Press, Durham
dc.rightsopenAccess
dc.sourceStress-The International Journal on the Biology of Stress
dc.subjectCellular therapyen
dc.subjectClinical translationen
dc.subjectClinical trialsen
dc.subjectEthicsen
dc.titleExamination 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 Analysisen
dc.typearticle
dc.rights.licenseARR
dcterms.abstractСавић, Снежана; Сиегел, Еван; Aткинсон, Керрy; Илић, Нина; Тасић, Љиљана;
dc.citation.volume1
dc.citation.issue12
dc.citation.spage898
dc.citation.epage908
dc.citation.other1(12): 898-908
dc.citation.rankM23
dc.identifier.wos000312823200005
dc.identifier.doi10.5966/sctm.2012-0037
dc.identifier.pmid23283551
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-84872922024
dc.identifier.fulltexthttps://farfar.pharmacy.bg.ac.rs//bitstream/id/510/1687.pdf
dc.type.versionpublishedVersion


Документи

Thumbnail

Овај документ се појављује у следећим колекцијама

Приказ основних података о документу