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 18 September 2017 | By Michael Mezher
The European Medicines Agency (EMA) on Friday said it could find "no clear and consistent" evidence of a difference in the risk of inhibitor development between recombinant and plasma-derived factor VIII medicines.
The announcement reconfirms EMA's conclusion from two earlier reviews of factor VIII medicines in 2013 and 2016.
The development of inhibitor antibodies is one of the greatest potential complications involved with treating patients with hemophilia A. When these antibodies appear, they can make factor VIII medicines less effective at controlling bleeding.
According to EMA, the latest review was carried out after an Article 31 request by Germany's Paul-Ehrlich-Institute after a study published in May 2016 found that recombinant factor VIII products had a higher rate of inhibitor development than plasma-derived products. EMA also says it re-examined its initial recommendations following a request from a marketing authorization holder.
The study, Survey of Inhibitors in Plasma-Product Exposed Toddlers (SIPPET), looked at some 250 male children under 6 years of age at the time of screening who were randomly assigned plasma-derived (n=125) or recombinant (n=126) factor VIII products. According to the results of the study, 29 patients in the plasma-derived arm developed inhibitors and 47 in the recombinant arm developed inhibitors.
Despite the study's findings, EMA said it could not find evidence that recombinant factor VIII products as a class presented a greater risk for inhibitor development than plasma-derived factor VIII when looking at four other randomized and observational studies.
And, EMA said the findings of the SIPPET study could not be extrapolated to all factor VIII medicines, "since many were not included in the study."
"When all these data were examined, they did not provide clear evidence of a difference in risk of inhibitor development between the two classes of medicines," EMA said.
Instead, EMA said the risk of inhibitor development should be evaluated on a product-by-product basis.
But, as a result of the review, EMA said it will update the prescribing information for factor VIII medicines to list inhibitor development as a "very common side effect" for previously untreated patients and as an uncommon side effect in previously treated patients.
EMA
Tags: Factor VIII, Inhibitor, Hemophilia A
Regulatory Focus newsletters
All the biggest regulatory news and happenings.