澳大利亚生物制品的新优先途径:背景化和评估拟议的改革。

IF 0.6 Q2 LAW Journal of Law and Medicine Pub Date : 2022-08-01
Christopher Rudge, Sara Attinger, Ian Kerridge, Wendy Lipworth, Cameron Stewart
{"title":"澳大利亚生物制品的新优先途径:背景化和评估拟议的改革。","authors":"Christopher Rudge,&nbsp;Sara Attinger,&nbsp;Ian Kerridge,&nbsp;Wendy Lipworth,&nbsp;Cameron Stewart","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This section examines recent reforms to the regulatory framework for biologicals contained in the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989 (Cth) in the context of the \"New Frontier\" of reform envisioned in a report completed by the Commonwealth Government in 2021. It compares Australia's proposed reform of the approval processes for biologicals to similar reforms that have been made over the last three decades in the United States and the European Union. It places the Australian reforms in the context of the commercialisation of regenerative medicine and identifies several potential shortcomings of the proposed reforms and reports on the current lack of data on the processes of expedited approvals in Australia more generally.</p>","PeriodicalId":45522,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law and Medicine","volume":"29 3","pages":"677-699"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A New Priority Pathway for Biologicals in Australia: Contextualising and Evaluating the Proposed Reforms.\",\"authors\":\"Christopher Rudge,&nbsp;Sara Attinger,&nbsp;Ian Kerridge,&nbsp;Wendy Lipworth,&nbsp;Cameron Stewart\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This section examines recent reforms to the regulatory framework for biologicals contained in the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989 (Cth) in the context of the \\\"New Frontier\\\" of reform envisioned in a report completed by the Commonwealth Government in 2021. It compares Australia's proposed reform of the approval processes for biologicals to similar reforms that have been made over the last three decades in the United States and the European Union. It places the Australian reforms in the context of the commercialisation of regenerative medicine and identifies several potential shortcomings of the proposed reforms and reports on the current lack of data on the processes of expedited approvals in Australia more generally.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45522,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Law and Medicine\",\"volume\":\"29 3\",\"pages\":\"677-699\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Law and Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law and Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本节将在联邦政府2021年完成的一份报告中设想的改革“新前沿”的背景下,研究1989年《治疗用品法》(Cth)中所包含的生物制品监管框架的最新改革。报告将澳大利亚提出的生物制品审批程序改革与美国和欧盟在过去三十年中进行的类似改革进行了比较。它将澳大利亚的改革置于再生医学商业化的背景下,确定了拟议改革的几个潜在缺点,并报告了目前缺乏关于澳大利亚更普遍的加速批准过程的数据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A New Priority Pathway for Biologicals in Australia: Contextualising and Evaluating the Proposed Reforms.

This section examines recent reforms to the regulatory framework for biologicals contained in the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989 (Cth) in the context of the "New Frontier" of reform envisioned in a report completed by the Commonwealth Government in 2021. It compares Australia's proposed reform of the approval processes for biologicals to similar reforms that have been made over the last three decades in the United States and the European Union. It places the Australian reforms in the context of the commercialisation of regenerative medicine and identifies several potential shortcomings of the proposed reforms and reports on the current lack of data on the processes of expedited approvals in Australia more generally.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
63
期刊最新文献
Challenging Pandemic Law: From Vaccine Mandates to Judicial Review of Vaccine Approvals. Cystic Fibrosis and the Law: The Ramifications of New Treatments. Denial of Desire for Death in Dementia: Why Is Dementia Excluded from Australian Voluntary Assisted Dying Legislation? Informed Consent and the Duty to Warn: More than the Mere Provision of Information. Insight and the Capacity to Refuse Treatment with Electroconvulsive Therapy.
×
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