Welcome to our new website! If this is the first time you are logging in on the new site, you will need to reset your password. Please contact us at raps@raps.org if you need assistance.
The site navigation utilizes arrow, enter, escape, and space bar key commands. Left and right arrows move across top level links and expand / close menus in sub levels. Up and Down arrows will open main level menus and toggle through sub tier links. Enter and space open menus and escape closes them as well. Tab will move on to the next part of the site rather than go through menu items.
The regulatory function is vital in making safe and effective healthcare products available worldwide. Individuals who ensure regulatory compliance and prepare submissions, as well as those whose main job function is clinical affairs or quality assurance are all considered regulatory professionals.
Share your knowledge and expertise with your regulatory peers by submitting an in-depth, evidence-based article focusing on key areas and emerging issues in the global regulatory landscape.
One of our most valuable contributions to the profession is the Regulatory Code of Ethics. The Code of Ethics provides regulatory professionals with core values that hold them to the highest standards of professional conduct.
Your membership opens the door to free learning resources on demand. Check out the Member Knowledge Center for free webcasts, publications and online courses.
Like all professions, regulatory is based on a shared set of competencies. The Regulatory Competency Framework describes the essential elements of what is required of regulatory professionals at four major career and professional levels.
RAPS Euro Convergence brings regulatory peers from the EU and worldwide together in one forum to gain insights and exchange ideas on the region's most pressing issues. Register today to attend 10-12 May 2021.
Registration is now open for RAPS Convergence 2021! Gather with the regulatory community 12-15 September for four days of learning, engagement, and excitement.
With contributions from more than 30 authors from seven countries, the new edition incorporates a global overview of the field and is designed to help you get the most out of your regulatory intelligence endeavors.
Regipedia is an interactive resource created to benefit RAPS members with 24/7 access to more than 2,300 regulatory terms.
Hear from leaders around the globe as they share insights about their experiences and lessons learned throughout their certification journey.
Posted 24 July 2014 | By Alexander Gaffney, RAC,
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has placed a Chinese pharmaceutical manufacturer on an import alert, banning the company's products from entering the country after it allegedly refused to allow access to FDA investigators.
The company, Beijing Shunxin Meihua Bio-technical Co., was placed on import alert by FDA on 22 July 2014. FDA's import alerts—one for refusing inspection, and the other for failing to operate according to good manufacturing practices—indicate that the firm "refused FDA inspection"—a big problem that the agency is now uniquely able to deal with.
In 2012, the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA) gave FDA authority under Section 709 of the law to ban a company's products if it delayed, denied or limited an inspection of a facility.
A year later, the agency released a guidance document on the subject, defining what it meant by those terms, and establishing under what terms a company might find its products banned from US markets.
In the past, some firms have sought to refuse or delay entry of FDA inspectors into their facility, hoping the additional time could be used to either clean up a facility or expunge certain records. In September 2012, for example, FDA released a Warning Letter to a Chinese company that reportedly threw FDA inspectors out of the manufacturing facility after they began uncovering a host of serious deficiencies.
The new rules were intended to prevent a company from stalling for time or covering up blatant deficiencies. The thinking is that any company that prevented FDA from access to a facility would be trying to hide something serious from the regulator.
It isn't clear from FDA's import alert what, specifically, caused the agency to ban Beijing Shunxin Meihua Bio-technical's products from entering the US. While the language implies that no FDA inspectors were permitted into the facility, lesser infractions might also have resulted in the same language under FDA's understanding of FDASIA Section 709.
The company was last inspected by FDA in February 2014, according to FDA data available on FDAzilla.
Tags: Import Alert, FDASIA, FDASIA Section 709, Delayed Inspection, Denied Inspection, Limited Inspection, Import Alert
Regulatory Focus newsletters
All the biggest regulatory news and happenings.