MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Post-approval Variations to Dossiers for Vaccines: Analysis of Regulatory and Methodological Approaches Used in the Russian Federation and Abroad

2019· article· en· W2940236078 on OpenAlexfundno aff
В. А. Шевцов, Yu. V. Olefir, В. А. Меркулов, В. П. Бондарев, Ivana Indiková, E. E. Evreinova, А. В. Рукавишников, L. M. Khantimirova, Д. В. Горенков

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Bulletin of the Scientific Centre for Expert Evaluation of Medicinal Products Regulatory Research and Medicine Evaluation · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBiosimilars and Bioanalytical Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHealth Canada
KeywordsRussian federationPolitical scienceDrug approvalBusinessMedicinePharmacologyEconomic policy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The management of post-approval changes to registration dossiers for medicinal products is one of the most important factors for ensuring sustainable quality, safety and efficacy of medicines. Competent authorities that use the module format of the registration dossier, i.e. the regulatory authorities of the European Union, USA and other members of the International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH), and the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU), issue guidelines on changes to registration dossiers for pharmaceuticals and biologicals (immunological products). Vaccines (finished dosage forms) and vaccine antigens (active ingredients) are a specific group of immunobiological products which have great prophylactic importance for healthcare, and which are associated with challenging development and specific methods of manufacturing and quality control. The procedure of introducing post-approval variations to dossiers for immunobiological medicinal products is poorly reflected in the current Russian and EEU regulations. The World Health Organization (WHO) established a procedure described in the «Guidelines on procedures and data requirements for changes to approved vaccines». The purpose of the present study was to compare current Russian and international legislation in terms of regulatory requirements for post-approval сhanges to dossiers for immunobiological products. The Federal State Budgetary Institution «Scientific Centre for Expert Evaluation of Medicinal Products» of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation is drafting Guideline on introducing post-approval changes into dossiers for immunobiological medicines. The draft includes a detailed review of various categories of changes based on their importance, and a list of conditions and required documents for specific groups of medicines. This article summarises scientific and methodological approaches to evaluation of changes introduced in registration dossiers for vaccines in order to further improve the regulatory framework of the Russian Federation and the EEU.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.031
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.057
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.161

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0310.057
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.245
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.201 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Bulletin of the Scientific Centre for Expert Evaluation of Medicinal Products Regulatory Research and Medicine EvaluationSame topicBiosimilars and Bioanalytical MethodsFrench-language works237,207