Background: FDA issues warning letters to pharmaceutical manufacturers, distributors, or clinical investigators if it observes serious violations of federal regulations. These warning letters contain the details about the nature of the violations observed and the corrective actions recommended by the FDA. A follow-up inspection may be requested by the recipient after taking the corrective actions.
Methods: Analysis of warning letters issued to Indian pharmaceutical companies from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2018, was carried out. The warning letters were extracted from FDA's public database.
Results: Across the 14-year study period, the number of warning letters issued to Indian pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers has gradually increased. Of all the violations listed in these warning letters, 85.87% were related to the failure of compliance with the cGMP guidelines. Moreover, 80.72% of these warning letters were not followed by a close-out warning, which indicated that the violations listed in these warning letters could not be resolved.
Conclusion: As the inability of the recipients to comply with the cGMP guidelines formed the majority of the violations observed in the warning letters, more resources and manpower have to be assigned to the manufacturing process of the pharmaceutical products.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2168479019879380 | DOI Listing |
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand
February 2025
Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain Medicine Division, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, Parma, Italy.
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand
February 2025
Department of Anaesthesiology, Centre for Cancer and Organ Diseases, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Span J Psychiatry Ment Health
December 2024
Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre (HCPA), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil; Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.
NPJ Digit Med
December 2024
Center for AI and Data Science for Integrated Diagnostics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Current regulatory frameworks for artificial intelligence-based clinical decision support (AICDS) are insufficient to ensure safety, effectiveness, and equity at the bedside. The oversight of clinical laboratory testing, which requires federal- and hospital-level involvement, offers many instructive lessons for how to balance safety and innovation and warnings regarding the fragility of this balance. We propose an AICDS oversight framework, modeled after clinical laboratory regulation, that is deliberative, inclusive, and collaborative.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!