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.
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 25 July 2016 | By Zachary Brennan
As the debate around high-priced pharmaceuticals and new ways to lower those costs continues, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is speeding the approval of new generic drugs, according to the latest update to the agency’s in-depth look at the backlog of abbreviated new drug applications (ANDAs).
The new data (up to 1 July 2016) reveals that FDA has reduced its ANDA workload by about 500 applications in the first six months of 2016 (the ANDA dashboard recapping 2015 can be found here). The agency has also approved 315 more ANDAs over that same time period and sent 66 more complete responses (or rejections) for industry action.
And similarly to past dashboards (like the one from May), FDA continues to seek more information or require companies to correct what’s known as an “easily correctible deficiency” for the vast majority of ANDAs. And in case the ANDA approval process seems to be a formality, the latest statistics show that FDA continues to reject far more ANDAs than it’s approving. In fact, for all of 2016, except for January, FDA rejected more than twice as many ANDAs as it approved.
The release of the latest dashboard comes as Janet Woodcock, director of the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) at FDA, reported on 11 July via email that as of 1 July 2016, CDER has acted on more than 90 percent of the Generic Drug User Fee Amendments (GDUFA) backlog, thereby accomplishing the agency’s backlog commitment more than one year ahead of schedule.
The confirmation of GDUFA’s success ahead of its deadline followed Woodcock’s prediction that the agency would accomplish the feat ahead of the next reauthorization of GDUFA, which is already underway.
Despite the success, a research letter recently published in JAMA found that of a sampling of 417 novel therapeutics, 210 were eligible for generic competition, though 36 (17%) had no generic drugs approved, 174 (83%) had one or more generic and 133 (63%) had four or more. Neurological drugs had the highest rate of having a generic equivalent, while oncology drugs had the lowest, according to the letter.
In addition, orphan-designated drugs “were significantly less likely to have at least 1, as well as 4 or more, generic approvals (55% and 27% respectively) than nonorphan-designated drugs (88% and 70%, respectively; P values < .001),” Ravi Gupta, Aaron Kesselheim, Nicholas Downing, Jeremy Greene and Joseph Ross, wrote.
The Generic Drug Review Dashboard as of 1 July 2016
Tags: ANDA backlog, generic drug approval, Woodcock, JAMA
Regulatory Focus newsletters
All the biggest regulatory news and happenings.