Regulatory policy and pharmaceutical innovation in the United Kingdom after Brexit: Initial insights

被引:5
|
作者
Hofer, Matthias P. [1 ]
Criscuolo, Paola [1 ]
Shah, Nilay [2 ]
ter Wal, Anne L. J. [1 ]
Barlow, James [1 ]
机构
[1] Imperial Coll Business Sch, London, England
[2] Imperial Coll London, Dept Chem Engn, London, England
关键词
medicines regulation; pharmaceutical innovation; United Kingdom; Brexit; health policy; Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency; DRUGS;
D O I
10.3389/fmed.2022.1011082
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Brexit was presented as an opportunity to promote innovation by breaking free from the European Union regulatory framework. Since the beginning of 2021 the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) has operated as the independent regulatory agency for the United Kingdom. The MHRA's regulatory activity in 2021 was analyzed and compared to that of other international regulatory bodies. The MHRA remained reliant on EU regulatory decision-making for novel medicines and there were significant regulatory delays for a small number of novel medicines in the UK, the reasons being so far unclear. In addition, the MHRA introduced innovation initiatives, which show early promise for quicker authorization of innovative medicines for cancer and other areas of unmet need. Longer-term observation and analysis is needed to show the full impact of post-Brexit pharmaceutical regulatory policy.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Understanding policy divergence after United Kingdom devolution: Strategic action fields in Scottish energy efficiency policy
    Webb, Janette
    van der Horst, Dan
    ENERGY RESEARCH & SOCIAL SCIENCE, 2021, 78
  • [42] After New Labour: political and policy consequences of welfare state reforms in the United Kingdom and Australia
    Wilson, Shaun
    Spies-Butcher, Ben
    POLICY STUDIES, 2016, 37 (05) : 408 - 425
  • [44] A co-design framework for natural resource policy making: Insights from tree health and fisheries in the United Kingdom
    Urquhart, Julie
    Ambrose-Oji, Bianca
    Chiswell, Hannah
    Courtney, Paul
    Lewis, Nick
    Powell, John
    Reed, Matt
    Williams, Chris
    LAND USE POLICY, 2023, 134
  • [45] What "Regulatory State"? Explaining the Stability of Public Spending and Redistribution Functions after Regulatory Reforms of Electricity and Rail Services in the United Kingdom and Germany
    Pflieger, Geraldine
    LAW & POLICY, 2014, 36 (02) : 195 - 221
  • [46] Analysis of Impact of European Medical Device Regulation and Brexit on the Regulatory Approaches in a Clinical Investigation Study on a New Class III Medical Devices Conducted in Europe and United Kingdom
    Houg, Candice
    Lihoreau, Thomas
    Hennessy, Martina
    Esperou, Helene
    Benamore, Rachel
    Palussiere, Jean
    Pazart, Lionel
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 15TH INTERNATIONAL JOINT CONFERENCE ON BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING SYSTEMS AND TECHNOLOGIES (BIODEVICES), VOL 1, 2021, : 250 - 258
  • [47] THE DIFFICULTIES IN IDENTIFYING THE INSTRUMENT APPLICABLE TO THE AGREEMENTS FOR THE ELECTION OF COURTS IN THE UNITED KINGDOM AFTER BREXIT (REGARDING THE AUTO AP VALENCIA OF 10th MAY 2022)
    Lopez-Tarruella Martinez, Aurelio
    REVISTA ELECTRONICA DE ESTUDIOS INTERNACIONALES, 2022, (44):
  • [48] How pharmaceutical and diagnostic stakeholders construct policy solutions to a public health 'crisis': an analysis of submissions to a United Kingdom House of Commons inquiry into antimicrobial resistance
    Glover, Rebecca E.
    Petticrew, Mark P.
    Mays, Nicholas B.
    Thompson, Claire
    CRITICAL PUBLIC HEALTH, 2023, 33 (02) : 197 - 206
  • [49] Demographic and clinical characteristics of initial patients receiving amyloid-targeting treatments in the United States after regulatory approval
    Mattke, Soeren
    Yue, Selena
    Becker, Andrew
    Liu, Ying
    ALZHEIMERS & DEMENTIA, 2025, 21 (03)
  • [50] A national screening policy for sickle cell disease and thalassaemia major for the United Kingdom - Questions are left after two evidence based reports
    Streetly, A
    BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2000, 320 (7246): : 1353 - 1354