ArticleBMC medicine2024
Post-marketing surveillance framework of cell and gene therapy products in the European Union, the United States, Japan, South Korea and China: a comparative study.
Article in BMC medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Global Panoramic analysis of clinical research in cell therapy: clinical trial landscape, marketed products, and regulatory trends.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Pooled it
- Regulatory Convergence in Cell and Gene Therapy: Harmonizing Quality, CMC, and Approval Pathways Across the FDA, EMA, PMDA, and Emerging Markets.Biotech (Basel (Switzerland)) · 2026Review
- Advances in gene transfer technologies: comparing viral and non-viral vectors for therapeutic applications.3 Biotech · 2026Review
- Exosomes in precision dermatology: From biomarkers to targeted therapeutics in personalized care.Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV · 2026Review
- Pathing the way from regulatory approval to market access for gene therapy products (GTPs): An integrative review in the US, EU5, Japan and China.Regenerative therapy · 2026Review
- Immunotherapy in Asia: current insights and prospects in Southeast Asia and Malaysia.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- The Economics of Drug Development: A Comparison between Orphan and Non-orphan Drugs.Current drug discovery technologies · 2026Article
- Pharmacovigilance in Cell and Gene Therapy: Evolving Challenges in Risk Management and Long-Term Follow-Up.Drug safety · 2026Review
- Safety Assessment of Stem Cell-Based Therapies: Current Standards and Advancing Frameworks.Cells · 2025Review
- Regulating nanomedicines: challenges, opportunities, and the path forward.Nanomedicine (London, England) · 2025Review
- Impact of regulatory measures on the approval timelines of advanced therapy medicinal products by the European Medicines Agency.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Mitochondrial and ER stress crosstalk in TBI: mechanistic insights and therapeutic opportunities.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCell and gene therapy products (CGTPs) often receive accelerated approvals, lacking comprehensive long-term safety and efficacy data, which can raise significant safety concerns. This research aims to study the post-marketing surveillance (PMS) of CGTPs in the European Union (EU), the United States (US), Japan, South Korea, and China, to offer insights for the development of a secure and standardized post-marketing regulatory framework for CGTPs.
methodsRelated regulations and the implementation effect of PMS for approved CGTPs were studied searching PubMed, CNKI, and the official websites of the European Medicines Agency, the US Food and Drug Administration, Japan's Pharmaceuticals and Medical Device Agency, South Korea's Ministry of Food and Drug Safety, and the National Medical Products Administration of China.
resultsCompared to those in China, the guidelines of PMS for CGTPs in the EU, the US, Japan, and South Korea was more comprehensive. Notably, the EU had dedicated regulations and supporting guidelines of PMS. Of the 26 CGTPs approved in the EU, 88% were under additional monitoring, 38% received conditional marketing authorization, and 12% were authorized under exceptional circumstances, with 77% designated as orphan drugs. The US had released 34 guidelines specifically for CGTPs which, forming the foundation of post-marketing risk management. Among the 27 CGTPs approved in the US, 22% were required to perform risk evaluation and mitigation strategies, 37% added black box warnings in the package inserts, 63% mandated to post-marketing requirements, and 15% subject to post-marketing commitments. In Japan, stringent supervision measures encompassing all-case surveillance (79%) and re-examination (53%) were applied to the 19 approved CGTPs, with 21% approved through conditional and time-limited approval. The PMS for CGTPs in South Korea, mainly included PSUR, re-examination, and re-evaluation. China had introduced several relevant regulations, which consisted of general statements and lacked detailed guidance.
conclusionsThis study demonstrates that the regulatory policies of PMS for CGTPs in the EU, the US, Japan, and South Korea were comprehensive. The implementation of PMS for CGTPs in the EU, the US, and Japan was well developed. This knowledge holds valuable insights for China's future learning and development in this field.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.