Amendments to the European pharmacovigilance legislative framework are expected to come into force in 2011, following the adoption of the proposed amendments to Directive 2001/83/EC on the community code relating to medicinal products for human use (hereinafter referred to as the Directive) and to Regulation (EC) No. 726/2004 laying down community procedures for the authorization and supervision of medicinal products for human and veterinary use and establishing a European Medicines Agency (EMA) [hereinafter referred to as the Regulation]. The Regulation shall apply 18 months after publication in the Official Journal of the European Union. The amendments to the Directive and the Regulation will induce changes in the EU in terms of evaluation of risk associated with medicinal products as well as the framework on how the EU takes harmonized regulatory action on drug safety. In this review, the text agreed between the European Parliament and Council is examined and compared with the pharmacovigilance legislative framework currently in force. We argue that the new legislation has improved numerous uncertainties in current legislative framework and provides for the following: (i) clear roles, responsibilities and obligations for the key responsible parties; (ii) rationalization of EU decision making on drug safety issues in order to deliver measures that are equally and fully implemented for all relevant products across the community with a view to preventing unnecessary patient exposure to risks; (iii) strengthening medicine safety transparency and communication so that the understanding and trust of patients and health professionals in the safety of medicines will improve, as well as the penetration of key warnings; (iv) strengthening companies' pharmacovigilance systems, allowing companies to improve their systems constantly while reducing administrative burden; (v) ensuring the proactive and proportionate collection of high-quality data relevant to the safety of medicines through risk management and structured data collection in the form of Post-Authorization Safety Studies (PASS), together with rationalized single-case and periodic reporting of suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs); (vi) involvement of stakeholders in pharmacovigilance through direct patient reporting of suspected ADRs and inclusion of patients and healthcare professionals in decision making; and (vii) simplification of the current community pharmacovigilance procedures with consequent efficiency gains for both the pharmaceutical industry and medicines regulators. For the first time, companies can be made legally liable to carry out PASS and Post-Authorization Efficacy Studies. The amendments to the Regulation and to the Directive will strengthen the European network on pharmacovigilance. A Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Committee (PRAC) based at the EMA will be set up, which will be responsible for all matters related to pharmacovigilance at an EU level. Three European databases will be strengthened (EudraVigilance, EudraPharm and the Europ...

-Purpose. The aim of this study was to identify common trends in the deficiencies identified in the quality part of the dossier during the evaluation of marketing authorisation applications for medicinal products for human use submitted through the EU's centralised procedure. Methods. We analysed all the adopted Day 120 list of questions on the quality module of 52 marketing authorisation applications for chemical entity medicinal products submitted to the European Medicines Agency and evaluated by the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP), during 12 consecutive plenary meetings held in 2007 and 2008. Subsequently we calculated the frequency of common deficiencies identified across these applications. Results. Frequencies and trends on quality deficiencies have been recorded and presented for 52 marketing authorisation applications. 32 "Major Objections" originated from 13 marketing authorisation applications. 13 concerned were raised regarding drug substances and 19 for drug products. Furthermore, 905 concerns on drug substance and 1,054 on drug product were also adopted. Conclusions. The impact of the frequencies and trends in quality deficiencies that were identified are discussed from a regulatory point of view. It is expected that the results of this study will not only be of interest to pharmaceutical companies but will also aid regulators' in obtaining consistent information on drug products based on transparent rules safeguarding the necessary pharmaceutical quality of medicinal products.

European Directives and Regulations introduced between late 2010 and 2012 have substantially overhauled pharmacovigilance processes across the European Union (EU). In this review, the implementation of the pharmacovigilance legislative framework by EU regulators is examined with the aim of mapping Directive 2010/84/EU and Regulation EC No. 1235/2010 against their aspired objectives of strengthening and rationalizing pharmacovigilance in the EU. A comprehensive review of the current state of affairs of the progress made by EU regulators is presented in this paper. Our review shows that intense efforts by regulators and industry to fulfil legislative obligations have resulted in major positive shifts in pharmacovigilance. Harmonized decision making, transparency in decision processes with patient involvement, information accessibility to the public, patient adverse drug reaction reporting, efforts in communication and enhanced cooperation between member states to maximize resource utilization and minimize duplication of efforts are observed.

When an innovative product (innovator) is not covered anymore by intellectual property rights, cheaper equivalent medicinal products (generic products) may be marketed and used in clinical practice. The regulation of generic products is well-established, and is primarily based on standard rules for quality, therapeutic equivalence requirements (the latter in most instances proven through a bioequivalence study), and safety data for the innovator. The extensive experience from bringing generic products to the market over the last decades allows the conclusion that they are well-accepted and provide a useful alternative option for cost-effective pharmacotherapy. While supporting this conclusion, there are a number of issues to be considered during the assessment of a generic product application. Six scenarios are described in total, from an efficacy and a safety perspective, where potential concerns with the current regulatory standards could arise in the approval of generic products. We also propose solutions to these scenarios in order to foster debate on these issues.

No abstract