ArticleTherapeutic innovation & regulatory science2026
Review Performance of New Active Substances in Taiwan: A 10-Year Retrospective Analysis (2015-2024).
Article in Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSince 2011, the Taiwan Food and Drug Administration (TFDA) has established various facilitated regulatory pathways (FRPs, including expedited and accelerated review frameworks) for new drug applications. In 2017 and 2019, TFDA implemented the Refuse to File (RTF) mechanism and conducted a comprehensive revision of FRPs, respectively. This study aims to evaluate the outcomes of these reforms from 2015 to 2024, focusing on New Active Substance (NAS) approvals, pathway utilization, and international comparison.
methodsNAS approvals between 2015 and 2024 were analyzed using TFDA's internal regulatory database, with U.S. Food and Drug Administration (US FDA), European Medicines Agency (EMA), and Japan's Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency (Japan's PMDA) data obtained from public sources. Analyses and visualizations were conducted with R.
resultsFollowing the 2017 and 2019 reforms, the on-time rate for the 360-day standard pathway surged from 19.0% of 21 cases in 2015 to 100% in 16 cases in 2024. A distinct structural shift toward FRPs was observed, as the proportion of standard applications declined from 80.4% to 56.4%. A contextual comparison of median approval times indicated that TFDA's timelines were broadly comparable to those of the EMA and moved closer to those of the US FDA and Japan's PMDA over the study period.
conclusionsThe TFDA review timelines became substantially more predictable, and the pathway distribution shifted toward FRPs. These changes followed the 2017 and 2019 reforms and reflect their combined contribution rather than any single mechanism. The cross-agency figures reported here serve as a general point of reference rather than a direct efficiency comparison, given differences in product mix, therapeutic areas, pathway eligibility criteria, submission timing and clock-stop mechanisms. Building on these developments, the forthcoming reliance pilot program is expected to further support patient access and regulatory resilience.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42678500What 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.