Skip to main content

Novartis seeks regulatory consistency in India

Swiss multinational drug giant Novartis, which was among a few firms that suffered setbacks in the Indian market pertaining to patents protection and clinical trials, wants India to ensure consistency in the regulatory environment to retain and attract global investors.

Referring to episodes like overnight changes in key regulations governing clinical trials a few years back that destabilised investments of MNC pharma firms, Novartis global drug development head Vas Narasimhan said such inconsistencies send out wrong signals to investors. 

Narasimhan, who was in India to participate in Bio Asia 2017 conclave at Hyderabad, said sudden regulatory shifts will affect MNC drug companies, who make long-term investments in innovation. 

"We (multinationals) cannot simply keep adjusting. That sends a signal that maybe, we shouldn't invest as much," he told ET. 

Admitting that things have improved in consistency with rest of the world and the regulatory environment has got better now from both intellectual property and clinical trials' perspective, he said, such environment enables MNCs "invest with certainty over longer periods of time." 

However, he said "the key is it stays this way and keeps improving. Then, I think you will have more (clinical) trials coming in". 

Novartis currently conducts more than 50 clinical trials in India across all its therapeutic segments. 

Apart from ensuring consistency in regulatory policy environment, India should also allay the apprehensions of global investors at the earliest "so that it gives confidence to the principles all over the world because these clinical trials have been planned for long-term investments and they will have implications on global (drug) filings," Novartis India president Jawed Zia said.

ᐧ

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Registration of herbal trials in CTRI is not mandatory

A trial patient visited the site complaining breathlessness and tachycardia. The investigator advised hospitalization but as subject could not afford the expenses, he refused for admission. Is this an SAE because investigator advised hospitalization? G Praveen Kumar. If the patient was not hospitalized, it does not fall into SAE criteria of hospitalization. However, it appears from your mail that the PI felt that the event was serious enough to admit the subject for treatment. This makes it an “important medical event." As per ICH E2A such event also are considered serious. See the ICH E2A excerpt below: Medical and scientific judgement should be exercised in deciding whether expedited reporting is appropriate in other situations, such as important medical events that may not be immediately life-threatening or result in death or hospitalisation but may jeopardise the patient or may require intervention to prevent one of the other outcomes listed in the defin...
Post a Comment
Read more

Evidence for Atypical Antipsychotic Drugs Called into Question

Despite massive advertising and booming prescriptions, use and sales, the new atypical antipsychotic medications such as Seroquel and Abilify – used to treat schizophrenia , bipolar disorder, depression and other illnesses – lack sufficient evidence to support their widespread and generalized usage. This according to a new study out of the Stanford University School of Medicine and University of Chicago. In the past decade, atypical antipsychotics have rocketed past many commonly prescribed, but older antidepressant and other psychiatric medications. Although initially touted as having few side effects, followup studies have found that atypical antipsychotics have serious side effects, including significant weight gain that can lead to diabetes and heart disease. “Because these drugs have safety issues, physicians should prescribe them only when they are sure patients will get substantial benefits,” said Randall Stafford, M.D., Ph.D., a Stanford associate pro...
Post a Comment
Read more

In India, there is no separate guidance on pregnancy reporting

How will we conclude that the subject is illiterate? Dr Prakash Atlam The guidelines don’t use the term illiterate. Their focus is subject’s ability to read and/or write. Schedule Y treats anyone who is unable to read or write in the same way. See the excerpt below. If the subject or his/her legally acceptable representative is unable to read/write - an impartial witness should be present during the entire informed consent process who must append his/her signatures to the consent form. While designing a protocol we found that there are high likely chances of worsening of some of the symptoms. Do we have to wait for these to happen and report it as SAE or in case we define them in the protocol upfront then can we prevent from expediting reporting it as SAE? Om Please see suggested guidance from ICH. Exemption from reporting such events would require prior agreement with regulatory authorities. ICH E3 12.2.2 Display of Adverse Events: All adverse events occurrin...
Post a Comment
Read more