对当前东非共同体药品监管协调联合审查程序的建议改进和该倡议的拟议新审查模式。

IF 3.1 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Pharmaceutical Medicine Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-04 DOI:10.1007/s40290-025-00554-1
Nancy Ngum, Chimwemwe Chamdimba, Dedith Mbonyingingo, Fred Siyoi, Emile Bienvenu, Mawien Atem, Adam Fimbo, David Nahamya, Burhani Simai, Stuart Walker, Sam Salek
{"title":"对当前东非共同体药品监管协调联合审查程序的建议改进和该倡议的拟议新审查模式。","authors":"Nancy Ngum, Chimwemwe Chamdimba, Dedith Mbonyingingo, Fred Siyoi, Emile Bienvenu, Mawien Atem, Adam Fimbo, David Nahamya, Burhani Simai, Stuart Walker, Sam Salek","doi":"10.1007/s40290-025-00554-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In 2012, the East African Community Medicines Regulatory Harmonization (EAC-MRH) initiative was established to improve access to safe, effective, and high-quality medical products to patients in the East African region. The East African Community (EAC) Partner States, the Republic of Burundi, Democratic Republic of Congo, Republic of Rwanda, United Republic of Tanzania, Republic of Kenya, Republic of South Sudan, and the Republic of Uganda, have a population of 290 million inhabitants. The timely access to medical products for this population was to be achieved through harmonisation of regulatory requirements, joint assessments, joint inspections of manufacturing sites, and the strengthening of regulatory systems. The aims of this study were (1) to investigate ways in which the regional initiative could be a well-coordinated and functioning regional assessment and inspection process on which national registration decisions can rely; (2) to investigate whether a sustainable semi-autonomous regional agency could provide regulatory guidance and coordination for the entire region; and (3) to propose a new and improved model for the EAC-MRH.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Three established questionnaires were used to collect and analyse data on the EAC national regulatory authorities (NRAs) and EAC-MRH initiative 2020-2023: (1) The Optimising Efficiencies in Regulatory Agencies (OpERA) questionnaire was completed by senior officials in the seven authorities that were leading the medicine registration departments about their own respective NRA. The heads of authorities of these NRAs further validated the completed questionnaire, which documented the general organisation of the authorities in terms of their structure, organisation, resources, review process, and timelines. (2) The Process Effectiveness and Efficiency Rating (PEER) questionnaire was completed by the seven authorities to obtain the views of the individual medicines regulatory authorities of the EAC-MRH initiative to identify the strengths and challenges regarding the performance of the joint assessment of the EAC-MRH initiative. (3) The PEER questionnaire, modified for the pharmaceutical industry, was completed by the heads of regulatory units in the pharmaceutical companies that had used the EAC-MRH process for the review and approval of their applications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The number of applications received for joint reviews increased from nine applications in 2015 to 44 applications in 2023, and the median review time reduced from 553 calendar days in 2015 to 259 calendar days in 2023. A key benefit for pharmaceutical companies using the work-sharing initiative to apply for marketing authorisation was the reduced burden associated with the need to prepare only one application for submission and eventual access to several markets simultaneously.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The EAC-MRH initiative can only be effective and efficient if the NRAs in the region are operating at an optimal level. Therefore, proposals were made to address the gaps identified in the regulatory review processes of the EAC NRAs and to improve effectiveness and efficiency. Importantly, a centralised submission and tracking process was proposed as the new and improved model for the EAC-MRH initiative.</p>","PeriodicalId":19778,"journal":{"name":"Pharmaceutical Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"125-141"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Suggested Improvements to the Current East African Community Medicines Regulatory Harmonization Joint Review Process and a Proposed New Review Model for this Initiative.\",\"authors\":\"Nancy Ngum, Chimwemwe Chamdimba, Dedith Mbonyingingo, Fred Siyoi, Emile Bienvenu, Mawien Atem, Adam Fimbo, David Nahamya, Burhani Simai, Stuart Walker, Sam Salek\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40290-025-00554-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In 2012, the East African Community Medicines Regulatory Harmonization (EAC-MRH) initiative was established to improve access to safe, effective, and high-quality medical products to patients in the East African region. The East African Community (EAC) Partner States, the Republic of Burundi, Democratic Republic of Congo, Republic of Rwanda, United Republic of Tanzania, Republic of Kenya, Republic of South Sudan, and the Republic of Uganda, have a population of 290 million inhabitants. The timely access to medical products for this population was to be achieved through harmonisation of regulatory requirements, joint assessments, joint inspections of manufacturing sites, and the strengthening of regulatory systems. The aims of this study were (1) to investigate ways in which the regional initiative could be a well-coordinated and functioning regional assessment and inspection process on which national registration decisions can rely; (2) to investigate whether a sustainable semi-autonomous regional agency could provide regulatory guidance and coordination for the entire region; and (3) to propose a new and improved model for the EAC-MRH.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Three established questionnaires were used to collect and analyse data on the EAC national regulatory authorities (NRAs) and EAC-MRH initiative 2020-2023: (1) The Optimising Efficiencies in Regulatory Agencies (OpERA) questionnaire was completed by senior officials in the seven authorities that were leading the medicine registration departments about their own respective NRA. The heads of authorities of these NRAs further validated the completed questionnaire, which documented the general organisation of the authorities in terms of their structure, organisation, resources, review process, and timelines. (2) The Process Effectiveness and Efficiency Rating (PEER) questionnaire was completed by the seven authorities to obtain the views of the individual medicines regulatory authorities of the EAC-MRH initiative to identify the strengths and challenges regarding the performance of the joint assessment of the EAC-MRH initiative. (3) The PEER questionnaire, modified for the pharmaceutical industry, was completed by the heads of regulatory units in the pharmaceutical companies that had used the EAC-MRH process for the review and approval of their applications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The number of applications received for joint reviews increased from nine applications in 2015 to 44 applications in 2023, and the median review time reduced from 553 calendar days in 2015 to 259 calendar days in 2023. A key benefit for pharmaceutical companies using the work-sharing initiative to apply for marketing authorisation was the reduced burden associated with the need to prepare only one application for submission and eventual access to several markets simultaneously.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The EAC-MRH initiative can only be effective and efficient if the NRAs in the region are operating at an optimal level. Therefore, proposals were made to address the gaps identified in the regulatory review processes of the EAC NRAs and to improve effectiveness and efficiency. Importantly, a centralised submission and tracking process was proposed as the new and improved model for the EAC-MRH initiative.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19778,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pharmaceutical Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"125-141\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pharmaceutical Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40290-025-00554-1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/3/4 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmaceutical Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40290-025-00554-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:2012年,东非共同体药品监管协调倡议(EAC-MRH)成立,旨在改善东非区域患者获得安全、有效和高质量医疗产品的机会。东非共同体伙伴国包括布隆迪共和国、刚果民主共和国、卢旺达共和国、坦桑尼亚联合共和国、肯尼亚共和国、南苏丹共和国和乌干达共和国,共有2.9亿人口。要通过协调监管要求、联合评估、联合检查生产场所和加强监管制度来实现这一人群及时获得医疗产品。本研究的目的是:(1)调查如何使区域倡议成为一个协调良好和运作良好的区域评估和检查过程,国家注册决定可以依赖该过程;(2)研究一个可持续的半自治区域机构能否为整个区域提供监管指导和协调;(3)提出了一种新的改进的EAC-MRH模型。方法:采用3份已编制的问卷,收集和分析EAC国家监管机构(NRA)和EAC- mrh计划2020-2023的数据:(1)监管机构效率优化(OpERA)问卷由领导药品注册部门的7个监管机构的高级官员完成,涉及各自的NRA。这些监管机构的主管进一步验证了完成的调查问卷,该问卷记录了监管机构的总体组织结构、组织、资源、审查过程和时间表。(2) 7家监管机构完成了流程有效性和效率评级(PEER)问卷调查,以获取各药品监管机构对EAC-MRH计划的看法,以确定EAC-MRH计划联合评估绩效的优势和挑战。(3)针对制药行业修改的PEER问卷由使用EAC-MRH流程审查和批准其申请的制药公司的监管部门负责人完成。结果:联合审评申请量从2015年的9件增加到2023年的44件,审评时间中位数从2015年的553日历天减少到2023年的259日历天。使用工作分担倡议申请上市许可的制药公司的一个主要好处是,由于只需要准备一份申请并最终同时进入几个市场,因此减轻了负担。结论:EAC-MRH倡议只有在该地区的nra以最佳水平运作的情况下才能有效和高效。因此,提出了建议,以解决在EAC NRAs的监管审查过程中发现的差距,并提高有效性和效率。重要的是,一个集中的提交和跟踪过程被提议作为EAC-MRH计划的新的和改进的模型。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Suggested Improvements to the Current East African Community Medicines Regulatory Harmonization Joint Review Process and a Proposed New Review Model for this Initiative.

Background: In 2012, the East African Community Medicines Regulatory Harmonization (EAC-MRH) initiative was established to improve access to safe, effective, and high-quality medical products to patients in the East African region. The East African Community (EAC) Partner States, the Republic of Burundi, Democratic Republic of Congo, Republic of Rwanda, United Republic of Tanzania, Republic of Kenya, Republic of South Sudan, and the Republic of Uganda, have a population of 290 million inhabitants. The timely access to medical products for this population was to be achieved through harmonisation of regulatory requirements, joint assessments, joint inspections of manufacturing sites, and the strengthening of regulatory systems. The aims of this study were (1) to investigate ways in which the regional initiative could be a well-coordinated and functioning regional assessment and inspection process on which national registration decisions can rely; (2) to investigate whether a sustainable semi-autonomous regional agency could provide regulatory guidance and coordination for the entire region; and (3) to propose a new and improved model for the EAC-MRH.

Methods: Three established questionnaires were used to collect and analyse data on the EAC national regulatory authorities (NRAs) and EAC-MRH initiative 2020-2023: (1) The Optimising Efficiencies in Regulatory Agencies (OpERA) questionnaire was completed by senior officials in the seven authorities that were leading the medicine registration departments about their own respective NRA. The heads of authorities of these NRAs further validated the completed questionnaire, which documented the general organisation of the authorities in terms of their structure, organisation, resources, review process, and timelines. (2) The Process Effectiveness and Efficiency Rating (PEER) questionnaire was completed by the seven authorities to obtain the views of the individual medicines regulatory authorities of the EAC-MRH initiative to identify the strengths and challenges regarding the performance of the joint assessment of the EAC-MRH initiative. (3) The PEER questionnaire, modified for the pharmaceutical industry, was completed by the heads of regulatory units in the pharmaceutical companies that had used the EAC-MRH process for the review and approval of their applications.

Results: The number of applications received for joint reviews increased from nine applications in 2015 to 44 applications in 2023, and the median review time reduced from 553 calendar days in 2015 to 259 calendar days in 2023. A key benefit for pharmaceutical companies using the work-sharing initiative to apply for marketing authorisation was the reduced burden associated with the need to prepare only one application for submission and eventual access to several markets simultaneously.

Conclusions: The EAC-MRH initiative can only be effective and efficient if the NRAs in the region are operating at an optimal level. Therefore, proposals were made to address the gaps identified in the regulatory review processes of the EAC NRAs and to improve effectiveness and efficiency. Importantly, a centralised submission and tracking process was proposed as the new and improved model for the EAC-MRH initiative.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Pharmaceutical Medicine
Pharmaceutical Medicine PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY-
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
4.00%
发文量
36
期刊介绍: Pharmaceutical Medicine is a specialist discipline concerned with medical aspects of the discovery, development, evaluation, registration, regulation, monitoring, marketing, distribution and pricing of medicines, drug-device and drug-diagnostic combinations. The Journal disseminates information to support the community of professionals working in these highly inter-related functions. Key areas include translational medicine, clinical trial design, pharmacovigilance, clinical toxicology, drug regulation, clinical pharmacology, biostatistics and pharmacoeconomics. The Journal includes:Overviews of contentious or emerging issues.Comprehensive narrative reviews that provide an authoritative source of information on topical issues.Systematic reviews that collate empirical evidence to answer a specific research question, using explicit, systematic methods as outlined by PRISMA statement.Original research articles reporting the results of well-designed studies with a strong link to wider areas of clinical research.Additional digital features (including animated abstracts, video abstracts, slide decks, audio slides, instructional videos, infographics, podcasts and animations) can be published with articles; these are designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. In addition, articles published in Pharmaceutical Medicine may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge of, but not in-depth expertise in, the area to understand important medical advances.All manuscripts are subject to peer review by international experts. Letters to the Editor are welcomed and will be considered for publication.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信