2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2009.08.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Case histories in pharmaceutical risk management

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
16
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8
1
1

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, buprenorphine products for treatment of opioid dependence are scheduled under the CSA and are subject to REMS (SAMHSA, 2014a). Approval of a methylphenidate transdermal system in 2006 was in the context of risk-management requirements to address concerns, including concerns about abuse liability, posed by the transdermal delivery approach (McCormick et al, 2009).…”
Section: The Fda Drug-approval Process Embodies Criteria Unlikely To mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, buprenorphine products for treatment of opioid dependence are scheduled under the CSA and are subject to REMS (SAMHSA, 2014a). Approval of a methylphenidate transdermal system in 2006 was in the context of risk-management requirements to address concerns, including concerns about abuse liability, posed by the transdermal delivery approach (McCormick et al, 2009).…”
Section: The Fda Drug-approval Process Embodies Criteria Unlikely To mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Of concern in developing REMS class-wide opioid programs is to balance the needs of patients and health professionals without mandating unduly burdensome restrictions [35]. On May 16, 2011, the FDA met with members of the Industry Working Group and other sponsors of long-acting and extendedrelease opioids to discuss next steps in implementing REMS for these products through a single shared system [36].…”
Section: Implementation and Consequences Of Remsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Subsequently, the October 2008 CPDD conference was organized around these four background papers as well as four case study presentations that highlighted risk management plans developed by pharmaceutical companies for recently approved medications. The background papers and a paper summarizing the case study presentations were peer-reviewed and edited for this supplemental issue (Leiderman, 2009; Carter and Griffiths, 2009; Dart, 2009; Dasgupta and Schnoll, 2009; McCormick et al 2009). At the meeting, the authors of all these papers were asked to give a summary presentation.…”
Section: Description Of the Process Used To Develop The Conclusionmentioning
confidence: 99%