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 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.
Resources, news and special offers to support you and your professional development during this difficult time.
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.
Download your copy of the new events calendar and see all the online workshops, conferences, RAC exams and European online workshops RAPS has planned for 2021 at a glance.
Registration is now open for RAPS Euro Convergence 2021! Attend to join peers from EU and around the world to gain insights and exchange ideas on the regions most pressing issues.
An invaluable resource for any professional engaged in designing, composing, compiling, or commenting on regulatory documentation
From self-assessments to help you identify your strengths and areas to focus on to reference books and online courses that will help you fill in the gaps in your regulatory knowledge, RAPS has the resources to help you prepare for the RAC exam.
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.
Posted 16 November 2016 | By Zachary Brennan
Earlier this week, a former deputy director of the US Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Office of Generic Drugs (OGD) settled charges that he provided tips on drug approvals to three hedge fund managers that made tens of millions off the non-public information.
The settlement raises some important questions on the so-called revolving door between industry and FDA, and what it means for patient safety. Is it OK for those in the pharmaceutical and medical device industries to take jobs at FDA or vice versa? And does this prior work experience help or hinder these employees in their new positions?
While the answers to those questions may never be fully answered, a recent flurry of employees moving between FDA and industry, as well as this latest settlement, have re-ignited the conversation around the connections between industry and the regulators that protect the public.
But what many who complain about the coziness between industry and FDA do not realize is that both sides work together on a continual basis—from cooperating and offering advice on drug development plans to tracking adverse events to forging agreements on the various user fees that industry must pay to FDA for its services that ensure a structured review process for drugs and devices.
In addition, FDA, which typically pays up to three times less than an industry salary, is struggling to fill more than 500 vacant positions and a lot of that needed expertise can come from within industry.
On Wednesday, Greenleaf Health Inc., an FDA regulatory consulting firm, announced that two former FDAers will join its ranks: David Elder, former principal advisor to FDA’s associate commissioner of regulatory affairs, and Kate Cook, former associate director for regulations and policy within the Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) and senior advisor in FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER).
Back in September, Parexel also confirmed to Focus that Ron Farkas, MD, PhD, of the division of neurology products in the Office of New Drugs, had joined the contract research organization that same month following FDA’s decision to approve Sarepta Therapeutics’ Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy drug.
On the flip side, FDA announced earlier this month that it’s bringing on Peter Stein, MD, former vice president for late stage development, diabetes and endocrinology at Merck Research Laboratories, who has more than 30 years of academic, clinical and industry experience.
While it remains to be seen how these recent employee changes will impact public health, if at all, what’s clear is that concerns over the performance of FDA Commissioner Robert Califf because of his links to drugmakers have proven to be unfounded.
But the uglier side of this revolving door can be seen in this week’s settlement of Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) charges of insider trading against two hedge fund managers and their source, Gordon Johnston, who worked for a dozen years at FDA and later at the Generic Pharmaceutical Association. Johnston leaked approval information to two of the hedge fund managers, one of whom reaped unlawful profits of nearly $32 million.
One of those hedge fund managers committed suicide in June and Johnston has pleaded guilty to multiple charges that carry possible prison terms and millions in fines.
And this isn’t the first time an FDA official has been charged with insider trading. In 2012, Cheng Yi Liang, a former FDA chemist was sentenced to five years in prison for engaging in insider trading on multiple occasions based on material, non-public information he obtained in his capacity as an FDA scientist.
FDA Deputy Commissioner for Operations and COO Walter Harris, in 2014, also testified before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform about monitoring FDA personnel’s use of the agency’s IT systems, saying, “FDA personnel are permitted access to information provided to the Agency by medical product sponsors and others and are required to maintain the strict confidentiality of that information.”
Tags: industry and FDA, employees at FDA, Califf, Parexel, Sarepta, Greenleaf
Regulatory Focus newsletters
All the biggest regulatory news and happenings.