Cargando…
An Evaluation of Malaysian Regulatory Process for New Active Substances Approved in 2017 Using the OpERA Methodology
INTRODUCTION: The National Pharmaceutical Regulatory Agency (NPRA) embarked on a regulatory-strengthening program and is evaluating its processes. Optimising Efficiencies in Regulatory Agencies (OpERA) is a regulatory-strengthening program that provides benchmarking data that can define performance...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7458937/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32865804 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s43441-020-00140-4 |
_version_ | 1783576296384626688 |
---|---|
author | Sani, Noraisyah Mohd McAuslane, Neil Kasbon, Siti Hidayah Ahmad, Rosilawati Yusof, Faridah Aryani Md. Patel, Prisha |
author_facet | Sani, Noraisyah Mohd McAuslane, Neil Kasbon, Siti Hidayah Ahmad, Rosilawati Yusof, Faridah Aryani Md. Patel, Prisha |
author_sort | Sani, Noraisyah Mohd |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: The National Pharmaceutical Regulatory Agency (NPRA) embarked on a regulatory-strengthening program and is evaluating its processes. Optimising Efficiencies in Regulatory Agencies (OpERA) is a regulatory-strengthening program that provides benchmarking data that can define performance targets and focus performance improvement. The objective of this study was to use OpERA methodology to determine where time is spent in the NPRA approval process and to form a baseline to measure the performance improvements. METHODS: The OpERA tool was used to collect specific milestone data that identify time periods, review stages, and data points for new active substances and biosimilars approved by NPRA in 2017. RESULTS: In 2017, 25 new active substances and 1 biosimilar were approved by NPRA in a median of 515 days, representing both agency and applicant time. The median time between dossier receipt and the initiation of NPRA scientific assessment was 135 days, but there was a wide variation in queuing time. The median total assessment time was 279 days (agency and applicant timing). NPRA took a median of 166 days; applicants took a median of 131 days to respond to deficiency questions, with up to 6 cycles of review required for approval and 65% of applications requiring 4–5 cycles to provide satisfactory responses. CONCLUSIONS: As a result of these data, NPRA proposes three improvements: target start for scientific assessment 100 days after file acceptance, a maximum of 5 review cycles, and applicant response time limited to 6 months. These results will serve as a baseline for further assessment. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7458937 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-74589372020-09-11 An Evaluation of Malaysian Regulatory Process for New Active Substances Approved in 2017 Using the OpERA Methodology Sani, Noraisyah Mohd McAuslane, Neil Kasbon, Siti Hidayah Ahmad, Rosilawati Yusof, Faridah Aryani Md. Patel, Prisha Ther Innov Regul Sci Original Research INTRODUCTION: The National Pharmaceutical Regulatory Agency (NPRA) embarked on a regulatory-strengthening program and is evaluating its processes. Optimising Efficiencies in Regulatory Agencies (OpERA) is a regulatory-strengthening program that provides benchmarking data that can define performance targets and focus performance improvement. The objective of this study was to use OpERA methodology to determine where time is spent in the NPRA approval process and to form a baseline to measure the performance improvements. METHODS: The OpERA tool was used to collect specific milestone data that identify time periods, review stages, and data points for new active substances and biosimilars approved by NPRA in 2017. RESULTS: In 2017, 25 new active substances and 1 biosimilar were approved by NPRA in a median of 515 days, representing both agency and applicant time. The median time between dossier receipt and the initiation of NPRA scientific assessment was 135 days, but there was a wide variation in queuing time. The median total assessment time was 279 days (agency and applicant timing). NPRA took a median of 166 days; applicants took a median of 131 days to respond to deficiency questions, with up to 6 cycles of review required for approval and 65% of applications requiring 4–5 cycles to provide satisfactory responses. CONCLUSIONS: As a result of these data, NPRA proposes three improvements: target start for scientific assessment 100 days after file acceptance, a maximum of 5 review cycles, and applicant response time limited to 6 months. These results will serve as a baseline for further assessment. Springer International Publishing 2020-03-28 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC7458937/ /pubmed/32865804 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s43441-020-00140-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Sani, Noraisyah Mohd McAuslane, Neil Kasbon, Siti Hidayah Ahmad, Rosilawati Yusof, Faridah Aryani Md. Patel, Prisha An Evaluation of Malaysian Regulatory Process for New Active Substances Approved in 2017 Using the OpERA Methodology |
title | An Evaluation of Malaysian Regulatory Process for New Active Substances Approved in 2017 Using the OpERA Methodology |
title_full | An Evaluation of Malaysian Regulatory Process for New Active Substances Approved in 2017 Using the OpERA Methodology |
title_fullStr | An Evaluation of Malaysian Regulatory Process for New Active Substances Approved in 2017 Using the OpERA Methodology |
title_full_unstemmed | An Evaluation of Malaysian Regulatory Process for New Active Substances Approved in 2017 Using the OpERA Methodology |
title_short | An Evaluation of Malaysian Regulatory Process for New Active Substances Approved in 2017 Using the OpERA Methodology |
title_sort | evaluation of malaysian regulatory process for new active substances approved in 2017 using the opera methodology |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7458937/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32865804 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s43441-020-00140-4 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT saninoraisyahmohd anevaluationofmalaysianregulatoryprocessfornewactivesubstancesapprovedin2017usingtheoperamethodology AT mcauslaneneil anevaluationofmalaysianregulatoryprocessfornewactivesubstancesapprovedin2017usingtheoperamethodology AT kasbonsitihidayah anevaluationofmalaysianregulatoryprocessfornewactivesubstancesapprovedin2017usingtheoperamethodology AT ahmadrosilawati anevaluationofmalaysianregulatoryprocessfornewactivesubstancesapprovedin2017usingtheoperamethodology AT yusoffaridaharyanimd anevaluationofmalaysianregulatoryprocessfornewactivesubstancesapprovedin2017usingtheoperamethodology AT patelprisha anevaluationofmalaysianregulatoryprocessfornewactivesubstancesapprovedin2017usingtheoperamethodology AT saninoraisyahmohd evaluationofmalaysianregulatoryprocessfornewactivesubstancesapprovedin2017usingtheoperamethodology AT mcauslaneneil evaluationofmalaysianregulatoryprocessfornewactivesubstancesapprovedin2017usingtheoperamethodology AT kasbonsitihidayah evaluationofmalaysianregulatoryprocessfornewactivesubstancesapprovedin2017usingtheoperamethodology AT ahmadrosilawati evaluationofmalaysianregulatoryprocessfornewactivesubstancesapprovedin2017usingtheoperamethodology AT yusoffaridaharyanimd evaluationofmalaysianregulatoryprocessfornewactivesubstancesapprovedin2017usingtheoperamethodology AT patelprisha evaluationofmalaysianregulatoryprocessfornewactivesubstancesapprovedin2017usingtheoperamethodology |