The Jordan Food and Drug Administration: Comparison of its Registration Process with Australia, Canada, Saudi Arabia and Singapore

Abstract

ObjectiveThis study outlines the current regulatory review process and good review practices (GRevPs) at the Jordan Food and Drug Administration (JFDA) and compares them with those of regulatory agencies in Australia, Canada, Saudi Arabia and Singapore to gauge how well the JFDA is performing. We identify opportunities for further development of the JFDA as a key global reference agency.MethodsPersonnel within the JFDA completed a questionnaire comprising four sections: organisation, key milestones, review timelines, and GRevPs. The same questionnaire was used concurrently to gather information from Australia’s Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), Health Canada, the Saudi Food and Drug Authority (SFDA) and Singapore’s Health Sciences Authority (HSA).ResultsThe JFDA conducts an abridged review for new active substances and requires a certificate of pharmaceutical product (CPP) at the time of submission and 6 months of pharmacovigilance data at the time of the final review as well as full pharmaceutical, chemistry, manufacturing and controls (CMC) and clinical data at the time of submission. A written summary and tabulated data are required for non-clinical data. The four comparator agencies conduct full assessments; the SFDA also requires a CPP, and the JFDA and SFDA both require pricing information at submission. All agencies have established target timelines, and the JFDA, SFDA, TGA and HSA currently exceed those targets. All agencies have also developed GRevPs as well as training and continuous-improvement processes.ConclusionsThe JFDA has achieved significant success in its role as a regulatory agency by setting and implementing clear regulations in line with international guidance. It is recognised as a training centre in the region, with considerable achievements in the development of its activities by simplifying and improving requirements, procedures and actions. It also publishes information regarding guidance, procedures, drug application submissions and registration dates for all new chemical entities on its website. The relationship between the JFDA and the pharmaceutical sector in Jordan has resulted in balanced, practical, internationally compatible regulations and demonstrates a viable model of collaboration. To assist the JFDA in its efforts to become a key global reference agency, it is suggested that the agency explore a risk-stratification approach to the regulatory review; accept CPPs after dossier submission or use alternatives to the CPP; conduct pricing evaluations in parallel with scientific assessments; establish defined target times for review milestones and improve internal tracking systems to monitor these milestones; and make certain information transparent to all stakeholders by publishing a summary basis of approval.

Evaluation of the Regulatory Review Process in Zimbabwe: Challenges and Opportunities

“…Unlike high-income countries, there is limited information in the public domain on the regulatory review/assessment systems and performance of LMIC [15]. Evaluation of the regulatory review systems of a number of high-income and upper middle-income countries, for example, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Turkey, and South Africa, are available in the literature [16][17][18][19][20]. However, it appears that there are few published assessments of the regulatory review systems in LMIC in Africa.…”

The Turkish Medicines and Medical Devices Agency: Comparison of Its Registration Process with Australia, Canada, Saudi Arabia, and Singapore

“…Therefore, there was a need for such a study, as the TITCK wishes to become a reference agency in the region. Similar studies have been carried out for Saudi Arabia (Hashan et al, 2016 ) the Jordan FDA (Haqaish et al, 2016 ) compared with Australia, Canada and Singapore, as well as Australia and Denmark (Aagaard et al, 2008 ). Therefore, a study was conducted to compare the registration review model in Turkey with Australia, Canada, Saudi Arabia and Singapore.…”

Comparison of BRICS-TM Countries' Biosimilar Regulatory Frameworks With Australia, Canada and Switzerland: Benchmarking Best Practices

“…Studies have been performed to compare the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority ( Keyter et al, 2019 ), Turkish Medicines and Medical Devices Agency ( Mashaki Ceyhan et al, 2018 ), the Saudi Food and Drug Authority ( Hashan et al, 2016 ) and the Jordan Food and Drug Administration ( Haqaish et al, 2017 ) with the regulatory authorities of Australia, Canada, Singapore and Switzerland, focusing on the area of small molecules.…”