Skip to main content
Log in

Evaluation of the Gulf Cooperation Council Centralized Procedure: The Way Forward

  • Global Perspective
  • Published:
Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of the study was to evaluate the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) centralized regulatory review process. Regulatory review times-including submission and application dates for new active substances (NASs) and existing active substances (EASs) using a standardized template for the period of 2006 to 2010—were collected directly from the GCC office located in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. A total of 413 products (96 NASs and 317 EASs) were approved during the period, with an overall significant increase in the EASs (P <.001). The median approval times increased from 107 calendar days in 2006 to 265 in 2010 (P <.001). The lowest approval time was for EASs submitted by the Gulf companies (134 days) and the longest for NASs submitted by international companies (346 days) (P <.001). These data were also analyzed according to therapeutic classes and dosage forms. The results also showed that the lowest number (n = 16) approved during the period was in 2010, and this was due to a major regulatory change implementing the International Conference on Harmonisation product stability guideline for the region. The findings indicate that the delay and the wide range in approval times could be reduced by utilizing a standard assessment template for product review and the implementation of a clock stop system for company responses to questions from the GCC central registration committee. Furthermore, using information technology tools would speed up the registration process rather than the manual exchange of product registration files between the executive office and the member states.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Al-Essa R. An Evaluation of the Regulatory Review Processes, the Quality of Decision-Making and Strategic Planning in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) States [PhD thesis]. Cardiff, UK: Cardiff University; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Anderson C. An Evaluation of Harmonization in the Regulatory Environment and Its Impact on Patients’ Access to New Medicines [PhD thesis]. Cardiff, UK: Cardiff University; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Rawson NSB. Time required for approval of new drugs in Canada, Australia, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States in 1996–1998. CMAJ. 2000;162:501–504.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Al-Essa R, Salek S, Walker S. An appraisal of good regulatory review practices in the Gulf Cooperation Council States. Drug Information J. 2012;46:57–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Al-Essa R, Salek S, Walker S. Regulatory review process in the Gulf Cooperation Council States: similarities and differences. Drug Information J. 2012;46:65–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. ICH Harmonised Tripartite Guideline. The Common Technical Document (Module 2 and 3). ICH Publication; 2000.

  7. Centre for Innovation in Regulatory Science. New Drug Approvals in ICH Countries 2003–2012: Focus on 2012. London, UK: Centre for Innovation in Regulatory Science; 2013. R&D briefing 52.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Mallia-Milanes A. An Evaluation of Quality Measures Applied to the Regulatory Review Process of Major Regulatory Authorities [PhD thesis]. Cardiff, UK: Cardiff University; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Hill S, Johnson K. Emerging Challenges and Opportunities in Drug Registration and Regulation in Developing Countries. London, England: DFID Health Systems Resources Centre; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Lambert G. Delays in the Registration of Pharmaceuticals in the Middle East: How Can These Be Resolved? London, England: CMR International; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Centre for Innovation in Regulatory Science. Evolving the Regulatory Review Process: What Are the Features That Enable a Transparent, Timely, Predictable and Good-Quality Review? Workshop Report, 6–7 December 2011, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. London, UK: Centre for Innovation in Regulatory Science; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Yauba Saidu Y, De Angelis D, Silvia Aiolli S, Stefano G, Georges AM. Product registration in developing countries: a proposal for an integrated regional licensing system among countries in regional economic blocs [published online March 7, 2013]. Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sam S. Salek RPh, PhD, FFPM, MRPSGB.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Al-Rubaie, M.H., Walker, S.R. & Salek, S.S. Evaluation of the Gulf Cooperation Council Centralized Procedure: The Way Forward. Ther Innov Regul Sci 48, 709–716 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1177/2168479014529572

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2168479014529572

Keywords

Navigation