New pathway for qualification of novel methodologies in the European medicines agency

Proteomics - Clinical Applications

Volumn 5, Issue 5-6, 2011, Pages 248-255

  Manolis, Efthymios ^a   Vamvakas, Spiros ^a   Isaac, Maria ^a  

^a EUROPEAN MEDICINES AGENCY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Drug development; Novel methodologies; Qualification

Indexed keywords

ALZHEIMER DISEASE; CLINICAL MEDICINE; CONSULTATION; DRUG INDUSTRY; EUROPE; EXPERIENCE; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; MEDICAL SOCIETY; METHODOLOGY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP; REVIEW;

ALZHEIMER DISEASE; ANIMALS; BIOLOGICAL MARKERS; DRUG DISCOVERY; EUROPE; HUMANS; ORGANIZATIONS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 79957618123     PISSN: 18628346     EISSN: 18628354     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/prca.201000130     Document Type: Review

References (17)

1. Innovative Drug Development Approaches Final Report from The Emea/Chmp-Think-Tank Group on Innovative Drug Development.
2. Challenges and Opportunities Report - March 2004 Innovation or Stagnation: Challenge and Opportunity on the Critical Path to New Medical Products.
3. Qualification of Novel Methodologies for Drug Development: Guidance to Applicants.
4. ICH Topic E15. Definitions for genomic biomarkers, pharmacogenomics, pharmacogenetics, genomic data and sample coding categories.
5. Regnstrom, J., Koenig, F., Factors associated with success of market authorisation applications for pharmaceutical drugs submitted to the European Medicines Agency European. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 2010, 66, 39-48.
6. Final Report on The Pilot Joint Emea/Fda Vxds Experience on Qualification of Nephrotoxicity Biomarkers.
7. Consultation on qualification opinion ILSI/HESI submission of novel renal biomarkers for toxicity. (last accessed 28 October 2010).
8. Qualification opinion ILSI/HESI submission of novel renal biomarkers for toxicity. (last accessed 3 December 2010).
9. Overview of comments received on "Consultation on qualification opinion ILSI/HESI submission of novel renal biomarkers for toxicity" (EMA/283298/2010). (last accessed 3 December 2010)
10. James, W. C., Best Practices Guideline: toxicologic histopathology. Toxicol. Pathol. 2004, 32, 126-131.
11. Burkhardt, J. E., Ennulat, D., Pandher, K., Solter, P. F. et al., Topic of histopathology blinding in nonclinical safety biomarker qualification studies. Toxicol. Pathol. 2010, 38, 666-667.
12. Dodd, D. A., Blind Slide reading or the uninformed versus the informed pathologist. Commun. Toxicol. 1988, 2, 81-91.
13. Iatropoulos, M. J., Appropriateness of methods for slide evaluation in the practice of toxicologic pathology. Toxicol. Pathol. 1984, 12, 305-306.
14. Prasse, K., Hildebrandt, P., Dodd, D., Goodman, D. et al., Microscopic evaluation of veterinary pathology slides. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 1986, 83, 184-185.
15. Roe, F. J. C., Toxicity testing: some principles and some pitfalls in histopathologic evaluation. Human Toxicol. 1988, 7, 405-410.
16. Weinberger, M. A., How valuable is blind evaluation in histopathologic examinations in conjunction with animal toxicity studies? Toxicol. Pathol. 1979, 7, 14-17.
17. Guideline on medicinal products for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease and other dementias' (CPMP/EWP/553/95 Rev.1). (last accessed 3 December 2010).