Regulatory Aspects of Regenerative Medicine in the United States and Abroad

ABSTRACT Background With the rising demand for natural‐looking aesthetic improvements, regenerative aesthetic medicine (RAM) has become essential for addressing aging, damage, and imperfections. The regulatory landscape overseeing RAM is dynamic, evolving with new technologies to ensure safety and efficacy. Objective This study reviews and compares regulatory frameworks for RAM across North America, Europe, Asia, Australia, and Latin America. Methods Regulations in the United States, European Union (EU), Australia, Singapore, South Korea, Brazil, Argentina, and Mexico were reviewed, focusing on risk‐based approaches, the extent of manipulation, and intended use of biological components. Results Frameworks in the United States, EU, Australia, Singapore, and South Korea share a risk‐based approach, adjusting regulations based on risks associated with biological components like stem cells and extracellular vesicles. Minimal alteration is categorized as low risk, emphasizing disease transmission prevention and material quality. Regulatory landscapes vary in Latin America. Brazil's comprehensive framework, managed by ANVISA, categorizes products by manipulation levels. Argentina's ANMAT has made progress, while Mexico lacks a unified framework, leading to unregulated operations and patient risks. Conclusion The diverse regulatory frameworks underscore the need for continuous collaboration between regulatory bodies, healthcare providers, and stakeholders to promote innovation and ensure safety in regenerative medicine.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Dermatological Reviews
Published
2024-08-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/der2.244
Citations
8
Primary Topic
Biomedical Ethics and Regulation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.61
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Regulatory Aspects of Regenerative Medicine in the United States and Abroad

Jane Yoo, Anesh Prasai, Dana Jaalouk, David Goldberg
8 citations
Dermatological Reviews
Biomedical Ethics and Regulation
2.61
article

Regulatory Aspects of Regenerative Medicine in the United States and Abroad

Jane Yoo, Anesh Prasai, Dana Jaalouk, David Goldberg
article en
8 citations

Abstract

ABSTRACT Background With the rising demand for natural‐looking aesthetic improvements, regenerative aesthetic medicine (RAM) has become essential for addressing aging, damage, and imperfections. The regulatory landscape overseeing RAM is dynamic, evolving with new technologies to ensure safety and efficacy. Objective This study reviews and compares regulatory frameworks for RAM across North America, Europe, Asia, Australia, and Latin America. Methods Regulations in the United States, European Union (EU), Australia, Singapore, South Korea, Brazil, Argentina, and Mexico were reviewed, focusing on risk‐based approaches, the extent of manipulation, and intended use of biological components. Results Frameworks in the United States, EU, Australia, Singapore, and South Korea share a risk‐based approach, adjusting regulations based on risks associated with biological components like stem cells and extracellular vesicles. Minimal alteration is categorized as low risk, emphasizing disease transmission prevention and material quality. Regulatory landscapes vary in Latin America. Brazil's comprehensive framework, managed by ANVISA, categorizes products by manipulation levels. Argentina's ANMAT has made progress, while Mexico lacks a unified framework, leading to unregulated operations and patient risks. Conclusion The diverse regulatory frameworks underscore the need for continuous collaboration between regulatory bodies, healthcare providers, and stakeholders to promote innovation and ensure safety in regenerative medicine.

Dermatological ReviewsVol. 5(4)
University of Miami (US), Schweiger Dermatology Group (United States) (US), The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston (US), Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (US)
Industry, innovation and infrastructure
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Biomedical Ethics and Regulation
2.61
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.