Skip to main content

Govt proposes abolishing clinical trials on proven drugs

Abolishing clinical trials for proven drugs will also lower the cost of medicines in India. Photo: Bloomberg

The move to abolish clinical trials of proven drugs will reduce time taken to introduce new drugs in India to just 45 days from 5-6 years.

In a move aimed at speeding up the availability of new drugs, the government has proposed doing away with clinical trials for drugs that have proved their efficacy in developed markets.

According to a proposed new set of rules, a part of which has been reviewed by Mint, the government suggested waiving local clinical trials for drugs that have not had any major adverse effects on patients.

These drugs should have been approved and marketed for at least two years in the European Union, UK, US, Australia, Canada and Japan. The ministry of health and family welfare has sent the draft proposal to the ministry of law and justice for vetting before it can be notified.

The move is expected to reduce the time taken by a company to introduce new drugs in the market from 5-6 years to as few as 45 days. According to the drug regulator, the move will also lower the cost of drugs.

"This will end unnecessary repetition of trials and speed up the availability of new drugs in the country—a win-win situation for both the industry and consumers," Drug Controller General of India G.N. Singh said in a phone interview.

Lengthy clinical trial and approval procedures deprive Indians of advanced medicines, said R.K. Vats, additional secretary in the health ministry.

Continue reading...

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