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 08 November 2016 | By Zachary Brennan
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on Tuesday announced a final rule amending regulations on citizen petitions that would ensure the agency does not delay the approval of a pending generic drug or biosimilar because of such petitions, unless that delay is necessary to protect the public health.
The final rule, which is effective 9 January 2017, implements section 505(q) of the Federal Food, Drug & Cosmetics Act (FD&C Act), which governs the manner in which FDA handles certain citizen petitions and PSAs that ask the agency to take action related to an abbreviated new drug application (ANDA), a 505(b)(2) application, or an application submitted under section 351(k) (ie. A biosimilar application).
For years, FDA has received numerous petitions requesting the agency not approve a particular ANDA or 505(b)(2) application unless certain criteria are met. But as FDA notes, in many cases, the petitions have raised scientific and/or legal issues relating to the standards for approval of an application (ie. suggesting a particular method for demonstrating the bioequivalence of a proposed generic to the reference listed drug (RLD) and petitions maintaining that a proposed generic product does not contain the same active ingredient as the RLD).
“However, when petitions are submitted late in the review process for challenged applications and do not raise valid scientific and/or legal issues, they may have the effect of improperly delaying the approval of an application,” the rule notes.
And by implementing this rule, FDA is essentially putting into action Congress’ desire to ensure that petitions are not used to improperly delay approval of generics or biosimilars.
The pharmaceutical industry lobbying group, known as Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), offered several comments and requested changes on the proposed rule but FDA rejected and responded to nearly all of them.
For instance, PhRMA requested that FDA include or otherwise establish a mechanism for notifying a petitioner if the agency determines that a delay of approval of an ANDA or 505(b)(2) application is not necessary to protect the public health, but FDA declined to implement such a mechanism as it was not included in the section of the legislation being implemented.
PhRMA also requested that FDA issue a regulation establishing (or clarifying) that a delay in an ANDA or 505(b)(2) application approval can extend beyond the 150-day review period for a petition.
But FDA said: “We decline to issue a regulation establishing or clarifying that a delay in approval of an ANDA or a 505(b)(2) application can exceed the 150-day review period for petitions. Because of the uncertainty in predicting the time it will take to resolve a particular issue, establishing an expectation on the possible length of a delay would be neither practical nor feasible.”
FDA said it estimates one-time costs to industry from this rule at about $613,800, while annual costs will likely be about $1,700.
Tags: PhRMA, citizen petitions, generic drug approvals
Regulatory Focus newsletters
All the biggest regulatory news and happenings.