Washington T Samukange, Verena Kluempers, Chancelar Kafere, Kristina Heinrich, Joanna Atemnkeng, Alireza Khadem Broojerdi, Florence Tirane, Edwin Nkansah, Shani Maboko, Linda Nhukarume, Khamusi Mutoti, Noel Aineplan, Helga Gardasdottir, Aukje K Mantel-Teeuwisse, Jens Reinhardt
{"title":"Bridging the gap: enhancing blood regulatory functions in African contexts through comparative analysis.","authors":"Washington T Samukange, Verena Kluempers, Chancelar Kafere, Kristina Heinrich, Joanna Atemnkeng, Alireza Khadem Broojerdi, Florence Tirane, Edwin Nkansah, Shani Maboko, Linda Nhukarume, Khamusi Mutoti, Noel Aineplan, Helga Gardasdottir, Aukje K Mantel-Teeuwisse, Jens Reinhardt","doi":"10.3389/fmed.2025.1519719","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Independent assessments of blood regulatory systems, facilitated by tools such as the WHO's Global Benchmarking Tool (GBT) plus Blood expedites development of National Regulatory Authorites (NRAs) and thus promotes increased access to safe, effective, and quality blood, blood components, and products. The aim of this study was to assess and compare the status of implementation and performance of the regulatory functions for registration and marketing authorization as well as the system for approval of blood, blood components and plasma for fractionation or processes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We did this by conducting assisted self-benchmarking in 12 African countries using the GBT plus Blood (registration and marketing authorization function, 34 sub-indicators and approval of blood, blood components, and plasma for fractionation or processes function, 24 sub-indicators). Comparative assessments of WHO-designated maturity level 3 (ML3) NRAs for medicines and vaccines against non-designated NRAs were made.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The percentage of implemented sub-indicators was higher for the registration and marketing authorization function with an average implementation score of 73% (range: 51%-92%) compared to the approval of blood, blood components, and plasma for fractionation or processes function which had an average implementation score of 45% (range: 6%-65%). The comparison of group averages for the ML3-designated NRAs against the non-designated NRAs revealed a higher score 91% (range: 71%-100%) for ML3-designated NRAs as opposed to a lower score of 71% (range: 49%-100%) for the non-designated NRAs for the registration and marketing authorization function. This pattern, however, was not observed for the comparison of group averages for the approval of blood, blood components, and plasma for fractionation or processes function where the ML3-designated NRAs scored 47% (range 19%-72%) against 46% (range 23%-88%) for the non-ML3-designated NRAs.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Most of the NRAs excelled in implementing sub-indicators for the registration and marketing authorization (of plasma-derived medicines) function. All NRAs exhibited notable flaws in regulating blood, blood components, plasma for fraction, and approval of processes, indicating nascent regulatory frameworks. This study highlights the urgent need for WHO and African countries to prioritize formal benchmarking of NRAs using the GBT plus Blood to enhance their regulatory capacities in blood and blood product regulation.</p>","PeriodicalId":12488,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Medicine","volume":"12 ","pages":"1519719"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12078219/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2025.1519719","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Independent assessments of blood regulatory systems, facilitated by tools such as the WHO's Global Benchmarking Tool (GBT) plus Blood expedites development of National Regulatory Authorites (NRAs) and thus promotes increased access to safe, effective, and quality blood, blood components, and products. The aim of this study was to assess and compare the status of implementation and performance of the regulatory functions for registration and marketing authorization as well as the system for approval of blood, blood components and plasma for fractionation or processes.
Methods: We did this by conducting assisted self-benchmarking in 12 African countries using the GBT plus Blood (registration and marketing authorization function, 34 sub-indicators and approval of blood, blood components, and plasma for fractionation or processes function, 24 sub-indicators). Comparative assessments of WHO-designated maturity level 3 (ML3) NRAs for medicines and vaccines against non-designated NRAs were made.
Results: The percentage of implemented sub-indicators was higher for the registration and marketing authorization function with an average implementation score of 73% (range: 51%-92%) compared to the approval of blood, blood components, and plasma for fractionation or processes function which had an average implementation score of 45% (range: 6%-65%). The comparison of group averages for the ML3-designated NRAs against the non-designated NRAs revealed a higher score 91% (range: 71%-100%) for ML3-designated NRAs as opposed to a lower score of 71% (range: 49%-100%) for the non-designated NRAs for the registration and marketing authorization function. This pattern, however, was not observed for the comparison of group averages for the approval of blood, blood components, and plasma for fractionation or processes function where the ML3-designated NRAs scored 47% (range 19%-72%) against 46% (range 23%-88%) for the non-ML3-designated NRAs.
Conclusion: Most of the NRAs excelled in implementing sub-indicators for the registration and marketing authorization (of plasma-derived medicines) function. All NRAs exhibited notable flaws in regulating blood, blood components, plasma for fraction, and approval of processes, indicating nascent regulatory frameworks. This study highlights the urgent need for WHO and African countries to prioritize formal benchmarking of NRAs using the GBT plus Blood to enhance their regulatory capacities in blood and blood product regulation.
期刊介绍:
Frontiers in Medicine publishes rigorously peer-reviewed research linking basic research to clinical practice and patient care, as well as translating scientific advances into new therapies and diagnostic tools. Led by an outstanding Editorial Board of international experts, this multidisciplinary open-access journal is at the forefront of disseminating and communicating scientific knowledge and impactful discoveries to researchers, academics, clinicians and the public worldwide.
In addition to papers that provide a link between basic research and clinical practice, a particular emphasis is given to studies that are directly relevant to patient care. In this spirit, the journal publishes the latest research results and medical knowledge that facilitate the translation of scientific advances into new therapies or diagnostic tools. The full listing of the Specialty Sections represented by Frontiers in Medicine is as listed below. As well as the established medical disciplines, Frontiers in Medicine is launching new sections that together will facilitate
- the use of patient-reported outcomes under real world conditions
- the exploitation of big data and the use of novel information and communication tools in the assessment of new medicines
- the scientific bases for guidelines and decisions from regulatory authorities
- access to medicinal products and medical devices worldwide
- addressing the grand health challenges around the world