Update on Regulation of Regenerative Medicine in Taiwan.

Due to rapid development of biotechnology in recent years, the field of regenerative medicine has attracted considerable attention. Regenerative medicine-related regulations have been established in several countries to ensure the quality, safety, and efficacy of innovative treatments. Considering the diversity of regenerative medicine, the regulatory framework in Taiwan has been adjusted in response to global trend and local demand. Before 2010, cell and gene therapies were regarded as "new medical practice" under the "Medical Care Act." Along with the establishment of Taiwan Food and Drug Administration (TFDA) in 2010, regenerative medicine was regulated as "medicinal products" under the "Pharmaceutical Affairs Act." Then, the Ministry of Health and Welfare (MOHW) established a new dual-track regulatory pathway for regenerative medicine in 2016. The dual-track pathway divided regenerative medicine into medical practices and medicinal products, aiming to improve the accessibility of new treatments to patients and maintain the flexibility for clinical operations. In order to refine the regulation, the MOHW proposed two draft Acts for regenerative medicine in 2022. The two draft Acts are currently under legislative process. It is expected that the research and development of regenerative medicine can be further accelerated, thus providing early access to innovative therapies for patients in the future.

Requirements for Additional Strength Biowaivers for Modified Release Solid Oral Dosage Forms in International Pharmaceutical Regulators Programme Participating Regulators and Organisations: Differences and Commonalities.

This article describes an overview of waivers of in vivo bioequivalence studies for additional strengths in the context of the registration of modified release generic products and is a follow-up to the recent publication for the immediate release solid oral dosage forms. The current paper is based on a survey among the participating members of the Bioequivalence Working Group for Generics (BEWGG) of the International Pharmaceutical Regulators Program (IPRP) regarding this topic. Most jurisdictions consider the extrapolation of bioequivalence results obtained with one (most sensitive) strength of a product series as less straightforward for modified release products than for immediate release products. There is consensus that modified release products should demonstrate bioequivalence not only in the fasted state but also in the fed state, but differences exist regarding the necessity of additional multiple dose studies. Fundamental differences between jurisdictions are revealed regarding requirements on the quantitative composition of different strengths and the differentiation of single and multiple unit dosage forms. Differences in terms of in vitro dissolution requirements are obvious, though these are mostly related to possible additional comparative investigations rather than regarding the need for product-specific methods. As with the requirements for immediate release products, harmonization of the various regulations for modified release products is highly desirable to conduct the appropriate studies from a scientific point of view, thus ensuring therapeutic equivalence.