Regulatory Aspects of Regenerative Medicine in the United States and Abroad

Dana Jaalouk, Anesh Prasai, David J. Goldberg, Jane Y. Yoo
{"title":"Regulatory Aspects of Regenerative Medicine in the United States and Abroad","authors":"Dana Jaalouk,&nbsp;Anesh Prasai,&nbsp;David J. Goldberg,&nbsp;Jane Y. Yoo","doi":"10.1002/der2.244","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>With the rising demand for natural-looking aesthetic improvements, regenerative aesthetic medicine (RAM) has become essential for addressing aging, damage, and imperfections. The regulatory landscape overseeing RAM is dynamic, evolving with new technologies to ensure safety and efficacy.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>This study reviews and compares regulatory frameworks for RAM across North America, Europe, Asia, Australia, and Latin America.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Regulations in the United States, European Union (EU), Australia, Singapore, South Korea, Brazil, Argentina, and Mexico were reviewed, focusing on risk-based approaches, the extent of manipulation, and intended use of biological components.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Frameworks in the United States, EU, Australia, Singapore, and South Korea share a risk-based approach, adjusting regulations based on risks associated with biological components like stem cells and extracellular vesicles. Minimal alteration is categorized as low risk, emphasizing disease transmission prevention and material quality. Regulatory landscapes vary in Latin America. Brazil's comprehensive framework, managed by ANVISA, categorizes products by manipulation levels. Argentina's ANMAT has made progress, while Mexico lacks a unified framework, leading to unregulated operations and patient risks.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>The diverse regulatory frameworks underscore the need for continuous collaboration between regulatory bodies, healthcare providers, and stakeholders to promote innovation and ensure safety in regenerative medicine.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":100366,"journal":{"name":"Dermatological Reviews","volume":"5 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/der2.244","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dermatological Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/der2.244","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

With the rising demand for natural-looking aesthetic improvements, regenerative aesthetic medicine (RAM) has become essential for addressing aging, damage, and imperfections. The regulatory landscape overseeing RAM is dynamic, evolving with new technologies to ensure safety and efficacy.

Objective

This study reviews and compares regulatory frameworks for RAM across North America, Europe, Asia, Australia, and Latin America.

Methods

Regulations in the United States, European Union (EU), Australia, Singapore, South Korea, Brazil, Argentina, and Mexico were reviewed, focusing on risk-based approaches, the extent of manipulation, and intended use of biological components.

Results

Frameworks in the United States, EU, Australia, Singapore, and South Korea share a risk-based approach, adjusting regulations based on risks associated with biological components like stem cells and extracellular vesicles. Minimal alteration is categorized as low risk, emphasizing disease transmission prevention and material quality. Regulatory landscapes vary in Latin America. Brazil's comprehensive framework, managed by ANVISA, categorizes products by manipulation levels. Argentina's ANMAT has made progress, while Mexico lacks a unified framework, leading to unregulated operations and patient risks.

Conclusion

The diverse regulatory frameworks underscore the need for continuous collaboration between regulatory bodies, healthcare providers, and stakeholders to promote innovation and ensure safety in regenerative medicine.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
再生医学在美国和国外的监管问题
背景 随着人们对美观自然的要求不断提高,再生美容医学(RAM)已成为解决衰老、损伤和瑕疵问题的关键。对再生美容医学的监管是动态的,并随着新技术的发展而不断变化,以确保其安全性和有效性。 本研究回顾并比较了北美、欧洲、亚洲、澳大利亚和拉丁美洲的 RAM 监管框架。 方法 回顾美国、欧盟(EU)、澳大利亚、新加坡、韩国、巴西、阿根廷和墨西哥的法规,重点关注基于风险的方法、操纵程度和生物成分的预期用途。 结果 美国、欧盟、澳大利亚、新加坡和韩国的框架都采用基于风险的方法,根据干细胞和细胞外囊泡等生物成分的相关风险调整法规。最小改动被归类为低风险,强调预防疾病传播和材料质量。拉丁美洲的监管情况各不相同。巴西的综合框架由 ANVISA 管理,按操作水平对产品进行分类。阿根廷的 ANMAT 取得了进展,而墨西哥则缺乏统一的框架,导致运营不受监管,给患者带来风险。 结论 多种多样的监管框架凸显了监管机构、医疗保健提供商和利益相关者之间持续合作的必要性,以促进创新并确保再生医学的安全性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Correction to “Complications After Exosome Treatment for Aesthetic Skin Rejuvenation” Steroid Injection Treatment for Nodulocystic Acne: A Literature Review Efficacy of Percutaneous Suture Suspension Biomaterials in Brow Lift: A Systematic Review The Potential of Cyperus rotundus L. As a Natural Hair Removal Agent: A Review of Traditional and Modern Applications Recent Update on Teledermatology
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1