A "Late Breaking" session was held on May 20 at the 2013 American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists-National Biotech Conference (AAPS-NBC) to discuss the US Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) 2013 draft guidance on Immunogenicity Assessment for Therapeutic Protein Products. The session was initiated by a presentation from the FDA which highlighted several key aspects of the 2013 draft guidance pertaining to immunogenicity risk, the potential impact on patient safety and product efficacy, and risk mitigation. This was followed by an open discussion on the draft guidance which enabled delegates from biopharmaceutical companies to engage the FDA on topics that had emerged from their review of the draft guidance. The multidisciplinary audience fostered an environment that was conducive to scientific discussion on a broad range of topics such as clinical impact, immune mitigation strategies, immune prediction and the role of formulation, excipients, aggregates, and degradation products in immunogenicity. This meeting report highlights several key aspects of the 2013 draft guidance together with related dialog from the session.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4012054 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1208/s12248-014-9587-6 | DOI Listing |
AIDS Res Ther
January 2025
Department of Biomedicine and Prevention, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy.
The global HIV epidemic remains a major public health challenge, with DTG playing a key role in ART regimens due to its efficacy and tolerability. This study evaluated virological outcomes and resistance mutations in patients on DTG in Mozambique through a retrospective cohort study in seven DREAM centers. Data from 29,601 patients (98.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFContraception
January 2025
MSI Reproductive Choices, London, England, United Kingdom.
Objective: We sought to develop consensus recommendations for measurement and analysis of data on contraceptive-induced menstrual changes (CIMCs) in contraceptive clinical trials. We built upon previous standardization efforts over the last 50 years and prioritized input from a variety of global experts and current regulatory authority guidance on patient-reported outcomes.
Study Design: We completed a formal consensus-building process with an interdisciplinary group of 57 experts from 30 organizations and 14 countries in five global regions who work across academia, nonprofit research organizations, the pharmaceutical industry, and funding agencies.
Appl Health Econ Health Policy
January 2025
General Practice Clinical Unit, Faculty of Clinical Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Introduction: Antimicrobial resistance is a global emergency related to overprescribing of antibiotics. Few studies have explored how prescribing behaviours may change as the consequence of changing resistance. Understanding how contextual factors influence antibiotic prescribing will facilitate improved communication strategies to promote appropriate antibiotic prescribing.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFDrug Saf
January 2025
Department of Public Health Pharmacy and Management, Sefako Makgatho Health Sciences University, Pretoria, South Africa.
Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated new vaccine development. Limited safety data necessitated robust global safety surveillance to accurately identify and promptly communicate potential safety issues. The African Union Smart Safety Surveillance (AU-3S) program established the Joint Signal Management (JSM) group to support identification of potential vaccine safety concerns in five pilot countries (Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa), accounting for approximately 35% of the African population.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFBr J Clin Pharmacol
January 2025
Sydney Pharmacy School, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Aims: An unbiased means of documenting medication-taking is important to ensure quality evidence about adherence research and to accurately identify individuals at risk of suboptimal adherence for the development of targeted and effective interventions. Guidance to assist researchers in the understanding of risk of bias when conducting or reviewing adherence research is currently not available. To address this gap, tools to identify and gauge the magnitude of important biases that may impact adherence research have been developed.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!