Mssusa Alambo K, Holst Lone, Kagashe Godeliver, Maregesi Sheila
Tanzania Medicines and Medical Devices Authority, EPI External Mabibo, P.O. Box 77150, Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania.
Department of Global Public Health and Primary Care, University of Bergen, Årstadveien 17, Block D, 5009, Bergen, Norway.
J Pharm Policy Pract. 2023 Nov 20;16(1):149. doi: 10.1186/s40545-023-00661-x.
The popular use of herbal medicines necessitates national regulatory authorities to have efficient mechanisms for the control of these products including marketing authorization (MA) and safety follow-up. Herbal medicines like conventional medicines require assessment of efficacy, safety and quality information before MA can be granted. However, the complete proof of safety is mainly based on the history of the long-term traditional use. Herbal medicines can cause adverse reactions due to various factors and thus require clinical trials to ensure their safety. Herbal medicines treatment practices involve combinations of different plants to achieve the desired effect while multiple herbal components have been known to cause herbal-herbal toxicity and interactions due to variety of complex active ingredients in plants. Compliance with regulatory requirements on herbal medicines has been shown to be difficult for manufacturers since different countries have different regulatory requirements with wide variations which results in the MA of very few herbal medicines. Limited studies on dossiers of marketing authorization of herbal medicines have been performed in other countries, with no studies in African regulatory system settings. The aim of this study is to determine the type of safety documentation that is submitted on herbal medicines application dossiers to support MA in Tanzania.
A cross-sectional retrospective study of herbal medicines dossiers submitted at the Tanzania Medicines and Medical Devices Authority from 2009 to 2020 was conducted.
As many as 75% of the herbal products applications were combination products made by more than one herbal substance or plant. Out of 84 dossiers subjected to analysis the majority did not provide evidence of preclinical (55%) and clinical safety data (68%). Evidence of safety data in humans was mostly from the literature (70%) and not manufacturers' clinical studies. Quality parameters with safety implications were not included in 48% and 23% of the active herbal substance and finished product specifications, respectively.
Analysis of the herbal medicine dossiers submitted showed major deficiencies of safety data to support MA. Manufactures need to provide evidence to support the safety of their products for evidence-based regulatory decisions and to avoid multiple reviews of the applications.
草药的广泛使用使得国家监管机构需要具备有效的机制来控制这些产品,包括市场授权(MA)和安全性跟踪。与传统药物一样,草药在获得市场授权之前需要评估其疗效、安全性和质量信息。然而,安全性的完整证明主要基于长期传统使用的历史。草药可能由于各种因素导致不良反应,因此需要进行临床试验以确保其安全性。草药治疗实践涉及不同植物的组合以达到预期效果,而由于植物中存在多种复杂的活性成分,多种草药成分已知会导致草药 - 草药毒性和相互作用。由于不同国家的监管要求差异很大,制造商很难遵守草药的监管要求,这导致获得市场授权的草药极少。在其他国家,对草药市场授权档案的研究有限,在非洲监管系统环境中则没有相关研究。本研究的目的是确定在坦桑尼亚提交给草药申请档案以支持市场授权的安全文件类型。
对2009年至2020年在坦桑尼亚药品和医疗器械管理局提交的草药档案进行横断面回顾性研究。
多达75%的草药产品申请是由一种以上草药物质或植物制成的组合产品。在接受分析的84份档案中,大多数没有提供临床前(55%)和临床安全性数据(68%)的证据。人体安全性数据的证据大多来自文献(70%),而非制造商的临床研究。分别有48%的活性草药物质规格和23%的成品规格未包括具有安全影响的质量参数。
对提交的草药档案分析表明,支持市场授权的安全数据存在重大缺陷。制造商需要提供证据来支持其产品的安全性,以便做出基于证据的监管决策,并避免对申请进行多次审查。