ReviewBiotech (Basel (Switzerland))2026
Regulatory Convergence in Cell and Gene Therapy: Harmonizing Quality, CMC, and Approval Pathways Across the FDA, EMA, PMDA, and Emerging Markets.
Review in Biotech (Basel (Switzerland)), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cell and gene therapies (CGTs) have progressed from proof of concept to an established commercial pipeline, yet global translation remains constrained by fragmented regulatory frameworks; heterogeneous Chemistry, Manufacturing, and Controls (CMC) requirements; and divergent approval pathways. This narrative review compares CGT quality, CMC, and approval-pathway regulation across the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), European Medicines Agency (EMA), and Japan's Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency (PMDA), together with five emerging-market agencies: Brazil, Russia, India, China, and Mexico (BRIC-M), current to June 2026. Four convergence gaps recur across all eight jurisdictions: unstandardized potency assay validation, inconsistent post-change comparability expectations, uneven ICH guideline implementation, and divergent evidentiary thresholds for small-population trials. Convergence readiness varies sharply within the emerging-market group, from ICH Regulatory Membership and internationally benchmarked CMC guidance in China and Brazil to reference-country reliance in Mexico and observer status in Russia and India. On this basis, we propose the Global CGT Regulatory Convergence Framework (GCRC-F), a reference architecture of four independently adoptable pillars: (i) Unified CMC Standards, (ii) a Data Harmonization Layer for long-term follow-up and real-world evidence, (iii) an Adaptive Approval Layer linking accelerated designations across agencies, and (iv) a Manufacturing Standardization Layer that is built on existing regulatory precedents rather than novel instruments, with participation tiered by demonstrated regulatory-science maturity. The framework is offered as a structured proposal for discussion; it has not been evaluated by regulators or industry stakeholders, and its feasibility remains to be tested through the consultation and case-study methods identified.
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.