Premium
Session V. Regulatory differences and similarities; Drug regulation in the United Kingdom
Author(s) -
Dollery Colin T.
Publication year - 1976
Publication title -
clinical pharmacology and therapeutics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.941
H-Index - 188
eISSN - 1532-6535
pISSN - 0009-9236
DOI - 10.1002/cpt1976195part2689
Subject(s) - license , certificate , session (web analytics) , certification , clinical trial , postmarketing surveillance , business , licensure , medicine , pharmaceutical industry , political science , adverse effect , pharmacology , medical education , law , computer science , advertising , algorithm , pathology
The British system under the Medicines Act by which new drug applications are evaluated is described in a step‐by‐step manner from submission of application to the issuance of a clinical trial certificate by the licensing authority, At the end of a period of clinical trials the submission is brought backfor a produet license. Once a drug is marketed it falls within the purview of the adverse reaction monitoring group of the Committee on Safety of Medicines (CSM). Arecent innovation is “monitored release,” by which, for a period of time after marketing, case reports are submitted by the pharmaceutical company to the CSM. The advantages of the British system are: (1) the final licensing decisions being made by the academic members of the Committee means that they are insulated from commercial and political pressures, and are addltionaliy reached without undue delay; (2) academic members are not permitted to be retained as consultants to the industry on a long‐term basis; (3) evaluation solelyon British. studies is not obligatory‐foreign studies are also acceptable. Weaknesses in the system are: (1) reeruitment of people experienced in pharmacology and therapeutics is difficult; (2) there is an inordinate work load on the academic members of the Main Committee and Subcommittees. lmportance of an effective monitoring in the postmarketing stage is emphasized, because the long‐term judgment must necessarily be based on wide experience in the filed. The multiplication of the same of similar drugs is deplored, and innovative efforts in the quest for new drugs, especially for rare diseases, are to be encouraged.