• Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology
• /
• v.29 no.10
• /
• pp.1495-1505
• /
• 2019

The Burkholderia cepacia complex (BCC) is capable of remaining viable in low-nutrient environments and harsh conditions, posing a contamination risk in non-sterile pharmaceutical products as well as a challenge for detection. To develop optimal recovery methods to detect BCC, three oligotrophic media were evaluated and compared with nutrient media for the recovery of BCC from autoclaved distilled water or antiseptic solutions. Serial dilutions ($10^{-1}$ to $10^{-12}CFU/ml$) of 20 BCC strains were inoculated into autoclaved distilled water and stored at $6^{\circ}C$, $23^{\circ}C$ and $42^{\circ}C$ for 42 days. Six suspensions of Burkholderia cenocepacia were used to inoculate aqueous solutions containing $5{\mu}g/ml$ and $50{\mu}g/ml$ chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX) and $10{\mu}g/ml$ benzalkonium chloride (BZK), and stored at $23^{\circ}C$ for a further 199 days. Nutrient media such as Tryptic Soy Agar (TSA) or Tryptic Soy Broth (TSB), oligotrophic media (1/10 strength TSA or TSB, Reasoner's $2^{nd}$ Agar [R2A] or Reasoner's $2^{nd}$ Broth [R2AB], and 1/3 strength R2A or R2AB) were compared by inoculating these media with BCC from autoclaved distilled water and from antiseptic samples. The recovery of BCC in water or antiseptics was higher in culture broth than on solid media. Oligotrophic medium showed a higher recovery efficiency than TSA or TSB for the detection of 20 BCC samples. Results from multiple comparisons allowed us to directly identify significant differences between TSA or TSB and oligotrophic media. An oligotrophic medium pre-enrichment resuscitation step is offered for the United States Pharmacopeia (USP) proposed compendial test method for BCC detection.

• Journal of agricultural medicine and community health
• /
• v.31 no.1
• /
• pp.63-79
• /
• 2006

Korea's self-sufficient food ratio on a quantity basis remained a low 27.6 per cent for cereals in year 2004. Even the public auction of imported rice from the United States kicked off a couple of days ago to allow foreign rice to be sold directly to consumers on the Korea market for the first time. Therefore the safety of imported food must be a great concern of Korean consumers. All imported agricultural products are supposed to be quarantined for controlling the insect and inspected for the potent risk like residual pesticides, aflatoxin, sulfur dioxide and genetically modified. agricultural products. The 12 percent of agricultural products contained the insects detected by National Plant Quarantine was fumigated with methyl bromide or aluminum phosphide and entered the custom. The most large portion of violated agricultural products (24 cases in 2004) inspected by Korea Food and Drug Administration was dried herbal medicinal foods contaminated by sulfur dioxide which must be treated when they were dried in China. The second factor made the imported agricultural products to be criminals (19 cases in 2004) was residual pesticides. Genetically modified agricultural products like soybean and corn are under control by labelling in Korea. Genetically modified soybean and corn have been used for oil expression mostly. It is the time to set up realistic risk assessment system for our consumer with the pouring imported agricultural products.

• Proceedings of the Korean Society of Toxicology Conference
• /
• 2006.11a
• /
• pp.75-79
• /
• 2006

The United States Food and Drug Administration is responsible for ensuring US residents receive safe and effective medicines. Since blood levels of drugs are correlated with pharmacological effect, FDA closely regulates how those blood levels are measured. The FDA has established requirements for bioanalytical analyses such as minimum method validation, SOP, and reporting criteria. The FDA also has standards for computer validation which must be followed to ensure the data are reliable. Data presented to the Agency are scrutinized to ensure they are accurate and a true reflection of the raw data generated in a study. To verify the quality of data, FDA has developed an inspection program. The specific requirements of the FDA related to bioanalysis will be discussed.

• Medical Lasers
• /
• v.9 no.2
• /
• pp.110-118
• /
• 2020

The non-ablative fractional dual laser is equipped with two types of lasers, 1550 nm and 1927 nm in one device, and was approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration in 2013. The advantages of the non-ablative fractional laser (NAFL) include fewer side effects such as erythema, edema, post-laser pigmentation, and scab formation. Thus, the NAFL is preferred by both practitioners and consumers because it is convenient and safe for use. The 1550 nm erbium glass and 1927 nm thulium lasers are representative NAFLs that have been developed separately and are often used as a single-wavelength laser with proven clinical efficacy in various indications. The 1550 nm wavelength laser penetrates the dermis layer and the 1927 nm wavelength laser is effective for epidermal lesions. Therefore, targeting the skin layer can be easily achieved with both the 1550 and 1927 nm lasers, respectively, or in combination. Clinically, the 1550 nm laser is effective in the treatment of mild to moderate sagging and wrinkles, scars, and resurfacing. The 1927 nm laser improves skin texture and treats skin pigmentation and wounds. It can also be used for drug delivery. The selection and utilization rate of NAFL has been increasing in recent times, due to changes in lifestyle patterns and the need for beauty treatments with fewer side effects and short downtime. In this study, we present a plan for safe and effective laser therapy through a review of literature. Clinical applications of the multifunctional NAFL are also described.

• Korean Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
• /
• v.34 no.1
• /
• pp.39-61
• /
• 2024

Background: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the European Medicines Agency (EMA), and the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (MFDS) have been implementing the expedited programs that promote the innovative approval of new medications to be used for serious diseases. The authors comprehensively investigated, analyzed, and compared the regulations and guidelines associated with the expedited programs. Methods: The expedited programs for innovative drug development and approval were searched from the homepages of FDA, EMA and MFDS. The detailed information on the regulations and guidelines associated with the programs was comprehensively extracted from various electronic repositories of each regulatory authority. The information on each program was analyzed, categorized, and compared from the points of benefits, applicability with scientific rationale, application procedure, and maintenance. Results: FDA's programs include Fast Track Designation, Breakthrough Therapy Designation, Priority Review Designation, and Accelerated Approval. EMA's regulation implements PRIority MEdicines (PRIME), Accelerated Assessment, Marketing Authorization under Exceptional Circumstances (MAEC), and Conditional Marketing Authorization (CMA). MFDS has a single Expedited Program. These programs are broadly categorized into those that 1) facilitate early and proactive communication with regulatory authorities, 2) shorten the review time after submitting a marketing application, and 3) temporarily approve a marketing authorization under certain conditions. Conclusion: Each expedited program requires a different level and amount of safety and efficacy evidence to be submitted to each regulatory authority. This article will likely provide the comprehensive information on which program provides scientific and regulatory advantages to be taken for innovative medication development.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.15 no.2
• /
• pp.63-89
• /
• 2014

In 1976, the Dalkon Shield-intrauterine device injured several thousand women in U.S.A. which caused the changes of medical deivce regulation. The Medical Device Regulation Act or Medical Device Amendments of 1976 (MDA) was introduce. As part of the process of regulating medical devices, the MDA divides medical devices into three categories. The class II, and III devices which have moderate harm or more can use the section 510 (k), premarket notification process if the manufacturer can establish that its device is "substantially equivalent" to a device that was marketed before 1976. In 21 U.S.C. ${\S}$ 360k(a), MDA introduced a provision which expressly preempts competing state laws or regulations. After that, the judicial debates had began over the proper interpretation and application of Section 360(k) In February 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Riegel v. Medtronic that manufacturer approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)'s pre-market approval process are preempted from liability, even when the devices have defective design or lack of labeling. But the Supreme Court ruled in Medtronic Inc. v. Lora Lohr that the manufactures which use the section 510 (k) process cannot be preempted and in Bausch v. Stryker Corp. that manufactures which violated the CGMP standard are also liable to the damage of patient at the state courts. In 2009, the Supreme Court ruled in Wyeth v. Levine that patients harmed by prescription drugs can claim damages in state courts. This may cause a double standard between prescription drugs and medical devices. FDA Preemption is the legal theory in the United States that exempts product manufacturers from tort claims regarding Food and Drug Administration approved products. FDA Preemption has been a highly contentious issue. In general, consumer groups are against it while the FDA and pharmaceutical manufacturers are in favor of it. This issues also influences the theory of product liability of U.S.A. Complete immunity preemption is an issue need to be more declared.

• The Journal of the Korean dental association
• /
• v.48 no.4
• /
• pp.256-262
• /
• 2010

bone grafting is indicated in the case of bony defects and is classified into autograft, allograft, and xenograft. Synthetic bone graft is contrasted with these three categories in that it has a different donor source. Autograft is most prominent as it is known as a gold standard of all grafting procedures. Its principles and practices are well established via accumulated informations and clinical experiences, which imposes no regulations or restrictions in its clinical use. On the other hand, other bone graft procedures are under tight control for the safety and effectiveness of each product. Food and Drug Administration of the United States has a system in which the information on the approvals and clearances of bone graft materials on their internet homepage. All the bone graft materials that are under the regulations of the United States are classified into the category of medical devices, which includes allogenic bone, xenogenic bone, and synthetic bone graft materials. Each bone graft material has its own indication and the FDA approvals and clearances of medical devices contain the item of "intended use" to specify the indications of each bone graft materials. US dentists, as users of the specific bone graft materials, are provided with adequate information on the approved materials they are to utilize. As an user of these materials, Korean dentists are less provided with the information on the bone graft materials they want to use. Medical providers of the bone graft materials have to be able to provide their users with the essential information such as the intended use of the regulatory approval. Dentists must also be active in gathering informations on the material of their interest, and the system must be built in which both of the medical providers and users of bone graft materials can be satisfied in providing and getting the information, respectively.

• Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology
• /
• v.21 no.9
• /
• pp.954-959
• /
• 2011

There have been a number of studies conducted in order to compare the efficiencies of recovery rates, utilizing different protocols, for the isolation of L. monocytogenes. However, the severity of multiple cell injury has not been included in these studies. In the current study, L. monocytogenes ATCC 19112 was injured by exposure to extreme temperatures ($60^{\circ}C$ and $-20^{\circ}C$) for a one-step injury, and for a two-step injury the cells were transferred directly from a heat treatment to frozen state to induce a severe cell injury (up to 100% injury). The injured cells were then subjected to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the ISO-11290, and the modified United States Department of Agriculture (mUSDA) protocols, and plated on TSAyeast (0.6% yeast), PALCAM agar, and CHROMAgar Listeria for 24 h or 48 h. The evaluation of the total recovery of injured cells was also calculated based on the costs involved in the preparation of media for each protocol. Results indicate that the mUSDA method is best able to aid the recovery of heat-injured, freeze-injured, and heat-freeze-injured cells and was shown to be the most cost effective for heat-freeze-injured cells.

• Korean Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
• /
• v.31 no.4
• /
• pp.257-267
• /
• 2021

Background: The need for regulatory science development to evaluate advanced regulatory products is gradually increasing without hindering the technological development. Creating a research environment and fostering experts through the establishment of regulatory agency-led policies are essential for the development of regulatory science. Method: This is a comparative study of the United States, Japan, Singapore, and Korea. The literature and websites of each regulatory agency were reviewed, and the focus was on advantages and comparing advantages based on definition, development trends, and expert training projects. Results: The United States is striving to develop regulatory science in response to changes in the new pharmaceutical industry through the regulatory science report, and to foster expert both inside and outside the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Japan is promoting regulatory science centered on regulatory science centers, and is focusing on researching work-related regulatory science within the Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency (PMDA) and improving employees' ability to make regulatory decisions. Singapore was aiming to improve Southeast Asia's regulatory capabilities under the leadership of Centre of Regulatory Excellence (CoRE) within Duke-NUS University. In 2021, Korea is in its early stages, starting to run a university's degree program related to regulatory science this year. Conclusion: Regulatory science should be developed with the aim of improving the regulatory ability of the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety with Korea's independent concept of regulatory science.

• Korean Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
• /
• v.25 no.3
• /
• pp.171-177
• /
• 2015

Background: Androgenetic alopecia (AGA), one of alopecias, requires continuous treatment in order to prevent or stop it, and patient's compliance is very important. Currently, only two drugs (finasteride, minoxidil) have been approved for AGA by Food and Drug Administration of United States (US FDA). However, another ${\alpha}-2$ reductase inhibitor, dutasteride, is approved by Korea Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (MFDS) through a phase III trial. For treatment, pharmacotherapy of AGA usually combines topical minoxidil 7% with one of oral <${\alpha}-2$ reductase inhibitor. Objectives: We evaluated the comparative efficacy and adverse effect between topical minoxidil 7%/finasteride 1 mg and topical minoxidil 7%/dutasteride 0.5 mg pharmacotherapy for outpatients with AGA. Also we evaluated the relationship between therapeutic effect and regular hospital visit. Method: This study was performed retrospectively based on electronic medical record (EMR) data of total 98 patients (topical minoxidil 7% with dutasteride 0.5 mg ($Avodart^{(R)}$) or finasteride 1 mg ($Alopecia^{(R)}$, $Propecia^{(R)}$) with diagnosis of AGA from department of dermatology at a secondary hospital from January $1^{st}$, to May $31^{st}$, 2014. Results: The efficacy and adverse event of topical minoxidil 7%/dutasteride 0.5 mg (DUTA group) were 100% and 45.7%, and of topical minoxidil 7%/finasteride 1 mg (FINA group) were 92.1% and 33.3%, respectively. The mean onset time of responses and adverse events in the FINA group were 3.86 months and 4.43 months. Those in the DUTA group were 3.97 months and 5.06 months. Conclusion: Both FINA and DUTA group were highly effective, but the DUTA group showed higher efficacy and adverse effects than those in the FINA group. Dutasteride may be another alternative in AGA treatment.