Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27084259›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of hematology2016

Regulatory approval pathways for anticancer drugs in Japan, the EU and the US.

Sumimasa Nagai, Keiya Ozawa

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of hematology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Challenges of Systemic Therapy Investigations for Bone Sarcomas.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Sumimasa NagaiDivision of Genetic Therapeutics, The Advanced Clinical Research Center, The Institute of Medical Science, The University of Tokyo, 4-6-1, Shirokanedai, Minato-ku, Tokyo, 1088639, Japan. sunagai-tky@umin.ac.jp.
Keiya OzawaDivision of Genetic Therapeutics, The Advanced Clinical Research Center, The Institute of Medical Science, The University of Tokyo, 4-6-1, Shirokanedai, Minato-ku, Tokyo, 1088639, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency and the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare in Japan and the US Food and Drug Administration are responsible for reviewing applications and approving drugs, medical devices, and regenerative medicines. In the EU, the European Medicines Agency is responsible for the centralized authorization procedure of medicines including oncologic drugs. In this review, we discuss general pathways for the marketing authorization of oncologic drugs and other drugs in Japan, the EU, and the US. There are still unmet medical needs in oncology, whereas scientific innovation and clinical development in oncology are rapid and active, suggesting a reasonable scope for new regulatory schemes for expedited review. Because regulatory schemes are also evolving rapidly, clinicians and academic researchers may have difficulty following the updated regulations in other regions as well as those in their own countries. However, keeping current with new regulations is important for the conduct of translational research and clinical development of new therapeutic products efficiently. This review is intended to help an international audience better understand the essence of the regulatory frameworks for the marketing authorization of oncologic drugs in Japan, the EU, and the US.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic AgentsDrug and Narcotic ControlDrug ApprovalEuropean UnionHumansJapanUnited StatesAntineoplastic AgentsEMAFDAPMDARegulation

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.