Current Trends at FDA: Implications for Data Requirements
|
|
- Horatio Black
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Introduction The environment surrounding medical device regulation in the United States has always been rigorous, but recent events including well-publicized quality issues associated with implantable medical devices have raised the scrutiny to which devices are examined prior to product approval and monitored for performance post approval. European requirements are undergoing a similar change in rigor as evidenced by the change from Directive to Regulation. The safety of medical products should be paramount in any determination regarding whether a product should be marketed. The US FDA is charged with evaluating safety and effectiveness as part of its mission to ensure the safety of public health as well as fostering access to new and innovative therapies. The current FDA climate requires significant data and scientific evidence to support approval for commercialization of new device on the US market. This article is intended to describe the types of data required by FDA and provide recent examples of how FDA is interpreting the regulations differently than in the past. Clinical Data to Support FDA Submissions FDA is requiring supportive clinical evidence for many more submissions, including both PMAs and 510(k)s. The PMA (premarket approval) route to market is typically reserved for the highest risk medical devices and requires a product be proven safe and effective on its own merit, whereas the 510(k) route to market allows moderate risk products to leverage experience from a product that has been on the US market. A 510(k) submission must demonstrate that the new product is substantially equivalent to another product that has been on the market since before 1976, when the medical device regulations were implemented. The need for supportive clinical evidence is a relatively new trend for 510(k)s that appears to have been triggered by heightened public scrutiny of this route to market. As a result, FDA reviewers are less willing to accept bench testing or logic to demonstrate substantial equivalence of the new device to the predicate. In addition, the amount of clinical evidence required to support US FDA submissions is increasing. FDA expects well-controlled clinical trials that minimize typical sources of bias and compliance with good clinical practice (GCP) standards, including a formal protocol defining the study specifics, ensuring adequate protection of human subjects, and establishing standard operating procedures governing processes to control all aspects of study performance, data integrity, and data reporting. Hierarchy of Clinical Data When considering the need for clinical data to support FDA submissions, the randomized controlled trial is the gold standard. This type of trial offers the most credible data because the design ensures that most sources of bias are minimized. In this type of design, all subjects meet the same inclusion and exclusion criteria, are treated and followed at the same centers by the same health care professionals, during the same time period. Therefore, the only real difference between the standard of care group and the investigational therapy group is likely the treatment itself or statistical chance. 1
2 While the randomized controlled trial results in the most credible data, there are times when it might not be feasible, or ethical to randomize subjects. For example, when companies were developing endocardial leads for use with implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs), there were physicians who felt it was not ethical to perform a thoracotomy to implant subjects with epicardial leads (which are placed on the outside of the heart through an open heart procedure) when those subjects could otherwise be treated with the endocardial lead (which is placed via an intravascular approach). Although the performance of the endocardial lead was unproven at the time of the study, there was sufficient experience with implantation of this type of lead with pacemaker devices and furthermore, testing of the lead was performed with each ICD procedure to ensure its effectiveness for its intended use. In this situation, credible data could be collected at clinical sites using the investigational endocardial leads with comparison to clinical sites using the standard of care epicardial leads. All subjects would meet the same inclusion and exclusion criteria as defined by the protocol, the same type of data would be collected from all subjects, and all subjects would be followed in the same manner. This type of study design is considered a prospective controlled trial. The sources of bias introduced in this type of study include the potential for site treatment or follow-up differences, statistical chance and, of course, differences due to the treatment. In the hierarchy of clinical evidence, the next most credible data would come from prospectively collected data from a single arm study compared to retrospectively collected data from the same subject, or matched control data selected from an available historical data set. In this type of study design, the control group data would be available in line listing form so FDA could reproduce the data analyses. The sources of bias introduced in this type of study design include differences in time and treatment standards, differences in site treatment or follow-up, statistical chance and of course differences due to the treatment. Moving lower on the clinical data hierarchy, then, would be single arm studies compared to historical data from literature reports. Literature represents some difficulties for comparison purposes because non-devicerelated and non-procedure-related safety issues are typically not reported in a manner similar to current clinical practices. Therefore, it is likely that differences will be seen in safety measures. Also, bias could potentially be introduced from the same sources identified previously. Note that although these data have the potential for bias, the data still may represent valid scientific evidence, and may be very useful for publication or for the advancement of scientific knowledge. Similar clinical evidence can be collected from data registries and meta-analyses from literature reports. These sources of clinical data again offer scientific evidence, but because sources of bias have not proactively been controlled, the level of credibility is less than what is typically required by FDA. To address FDA s need for higher levels of valid scientific evidence, we recommend that Sponsors design a clinical study to provide the highest level of credible clinical data as possible, balancing the need to be practical for clinical investigators. At study completion, highly credible data is a very valuable tool for regulatory purposes, for reimbursement purposes as well as for marketing purposes. 2
3 Statistical Data to Support FDA Submissions Another emerging trend in FDA review of submissions is the need to demonstrate statistical significance to prove clinical effectiveness of a new treatment. The reviewing clinicians at FDA rely on the statisticians to interpret the data and justify statistically whether the stated claims and intended use can be supported by the endpoints and analyses of the resulting data. During the clinical study design phase, objectives, performance endpoints, and the statistical sample size are determined a priori based on expected assumptions. If after the study is completed a statistical endpoint is not met, it may be because there was not enough subjects studied, or the assumptions used to develop the statistics might have been flawed or the product might not perform better than the standard of care. In these cases if a statistical justification cannot be supported the FDA and their medical reviewers will try to assess if the data support a clinical justification. The current trend in FDA reviews is that clinical justifications are generally insufficient in the absence of the statistical support. FDA and FDA s Advisory Committees have requested additional clinical studies be conducted, often with a new design or new assumptions in cases such as these. Even when FDA is involved in providing input into the clinical study design before the study is initiated, there is, of course, no guarantee that the study will yield statistically significant results upon its completion. There have also been cases where a study did meet its defined endpoints, but in the final analysis FDA and its medical reviewers felt that the defined endpoint was not sufficiently clinically relevant and required further confirmatory studies. Therefore, it is important to work with knowledgeable clinicians to understand the expected performance of the new therapy, determine conservative statistical assumptions, and ensure FDA is supportive of the study design. A pilot study is often helpful in providing early evidence upon which to base performance and statistical assumptions. These efforts will be helpful in determining the best possibility of success for the study for all parties. The Importance of Intended Use The key element when developing the FDA strategy is the Intended Use, or the statements made in the labeling regarding how the product is intended to be used by the healthcare professional. It is this language that will drive the evidence FDA will need to support an approval/clearance decision for commercialization of the product in the US. For example, a device filter on a cardiovascular catheter intended to prevent thrombus from embolizing to prevent stroke would require a significant clinical trial to demonstrate a difference in stroke events in a population of subjects with the filter versus a population of subjects treated without the filter. The same device filter intended for use in preventing embolization to the extremities and limbs would require a different study. The same device filter used with a cardiovascular catheter for general infusion use might only require bench data. The Intended Use statement is also a critical element in determining the regulatory route to market, particularly whether a product can be authorized for market via a PMA or a 510(k) route. Where a similar product is already on the market and is classified as Class II (falling into a moderate risk category), a new product can follow the 510(k) path by using an identical Intended Use statement as that of the predicate device. New Intended Use statements will automatically eliminate the option to pursue a 510(k), requiring a PMA path for high risk devices or a new De Novo process for moderate and low risk devices. 3
4 De Novo Process Until earlier this year, FDA law required that any new devices that did not fall into the 510(k) category were automatically classified as Class III requiring a PMA. US regulations, however, acknowledged that some of these devices would be low to moderate risk and as such did not need to be subject to the high level of scrutiny and resource requirements for a PMA submission. FDA issued a guidance document that allowed an alternative to the automatic Class III designation which was called a de novo application. In these cases, sponsors submitted a 510(k), received a not substantially equivalent decision, and within 30 days submitted a de novo application providing information to demonstrate that the product presents only a low to moderate risk to public health. The de novo process also required FDA to issue a guidance document for future devices that will use the subject device as a predicate. When FDA granted a clearance decision, the product was placed in Class II. Earlier this year, US Congress passed a new law that codified the de novo process and made it a single step submission no longer requiring the first step of a standard 510(k) application. It remains to be seen what FDA will expect to see as part of the submission to incorporate the information typically included in a 510(k) as well as the risk/benefit assessment. But it is clear that FDA is being very strict about 510(k) predicates and intended use language, thus sending more devices through the de novo process. FDA does prefer that companies who plan to pursue the de novo pathway request a pre-submission meeting to discuss the available data and allow FDA an opportunity to comment on information they would expect to see in a de novo application. Companies should be prepared to present their plans rather than expecting FDA to make recommendations. This pre-submission process can require 2-3 months to schedule and conduct the meeting, but the feedback can be valuable in understanding FDA s expectations when topics are controversial or it is unknown whether FDA will accept a proposed plan. FDA will often expect clinical data in support of de novo applications, particularly in situations where the intended use has been expanded beyond that of a predicate product. For example, a product that has a general indication, but for which a specific indication is being sought, would need clinical data support for the specific indication. Also, if a product has significant differences in technological characteristics from a predicate product, clinical data may also be required to demonstrate the safety profile of the product with those differences. The de novo submission process, although new, offers a faster alternative route to the US market compared to the PMA submission. Companies need to be aware of the requirements and solicit feedback from FDA to meet their expectations, in order to find the shortest path through the regulatory hurdles. Leveraging Other Sources of Data In the product development process overall, many types of data are generated including bench and mechanical testing, biocompatibility testing, pre-clinical animal testing, pilot clinical data, clinical data that is collected in specific countries to meet their regulatory or reimbursement needs, health economics data, post-market clinical follow-up and post-approval studies, etc. When developing a US regulatory plan, all types of data should be considered as to what will be useful in demonstrating safety and effectiveness, substantial equivalence or a positive risk/benefit analysis. For a typical 510(k), mechanical and bench data often are sufficient. For new and 4
5 novel products, FDA typically requires a small pilot study before allowing progression to a large scale pivotal trial. In many cases, companies can leverage clinical experience from outside the United States in lieu of a pilot study. The EU and FDA are now requiring post-market surveillance monitoring which usually consist of passive data collection on reported adverse events (e.g., MDR and vigilance reporting) and active data collection in the form of post-market studies and clinical follow-up. Additionally, third-party payors are requesting post-approval data to demonstrate that the product continues to perform as expected when used in all patients, in all healthcare settings. Companies should assess whether a single study design can be used to collect data to serve all the post-market clinical needs for US, EU and reimbursement purposes. Significant cost savings can be realized by setting up and conducting one study meeting many needs instead of managing multiple studies. Conclusions FDA s interpretation of the regulations is changing and has resulted in heightened requirements for clinical data and statistical relevance. Where FDA previously exercised some flexibility in evaluating Intended Use language and determining the regulatory route to market, they are now taking a strict view and holding firm to a narrow interpretation of the regulations. As such, companies wishing to enter the market in the US should develop a regulatory plan that includes sufficient data support and specifically, clinical evidence to support stated claims for the product. These requirements are not just new for the US market, similar requirements are being mandated for European regulatory needs, but are also useful for reimbursement and marketing as well. A well-designed, well-conducted clinical study can be leveraged for multiple purposes, but will particularly facilitate the submission process in the US when the data are supportive. Investment in clinical evidence to support regulatory applications in general and US applications in particular is funding well-spent, especially in light of FDA s current environment. 5
Issues in Clinical Trial Designs for Devices
Issues in Clinical Trial Designs for Devices Soma Kalb, PhD Director, Investigational Device Exemption (IDE) Program Office of Device Evaluation Center for Devices and Radiological Health FDA Clinical
More informationDocket #: FDA-2018-D-3268
Subject: Comment on FDA Draft Guidance for Industry Titled Rare Diseases: Early Drug Development and the Role of Pre-Investigational New Drug Application Meetings Docket #: FDA-2018-D-3268 ARM is an international
More informationStructure and Mandate of FDA
Structure and Mandate of FDA Leonard Sacks, M.D. Office of Medical Policy Center for Drug Evaluation and Research FDA FDA Clinical Investigator Training Course November 13, 2018 Mission of regulatory agencies
More informationCLINICAL REPORTS HOW TO LEVERAGE PUBLISHED DATA EVALUATION
CLINICAL EVALUATION REPORTS HOW TO LEVERAGE PUBLISHED DATA If you are not a medical device company or do not have devices on the market in Europe, then comprehensive clinical evaluation reports may be
More informationPlanning for Successful Medical Device Reimbursement:
Planning for Successful Medical Device Reimbursement: So Your Device Is Cleared, By Tiffini Diage, MPH Health Economics NAMSA White Paper Key Considerations for Targeting Success of Medical Device Sales
More informationCase studies in the design, analysis and interpretation of non-inferiority trials
Case studies in the design, analysis and interpretation of non-inferiority trials Krishan Singh, Ph.D. GlaxoSmithKline EFSPI Verona, Nov '08 1 Outline Introduction & Background Case Studies Altabax a topical
More informationBrazilian Health Surveillance Agency ANVISA. General Management of Technology of Health Products GGTPS TECHNICAL NOTE NO. 004/2016/GGTPS/DIREG/ANVISA
Brazilian Health Surveillance Agency ANVISA General Management of Technology of Health Products GGTPS TECHNICAL NOTE NO. 004/2016/GGTPS/DIREG/ANVISA Object: Requirements to determine the need for clinical
More informationClinical Research and Adjudication
Clinical Research and Adjudication Rick Kuntz, MD, MSc Chief Scientific, Clinical and Regulatory Officer Medtronic, Inc. Medical Device Unanswered Questions Need for Surveillance Device performance: Efficacy
More informationPragmatic Clinical Trials for Regulatory Decisions
Pragmatic Clinical Trials for Regulatory Decisions Jacqueline Corrigan-Curay, MD JD Office of Medical Policy Center for Drug Evaluation and Research FDA May 16, 2018 Pragmatic Clinical Trials Pragmatic
More informationRegulatory Challenges for the
1st Invitational Workshop Workshop on Body Area Network Technology and Applications Future Directions, Technologies, Standards and Applications June 19-20, 2011 Worcester Polytechnic Institute Regulatory
More informationPHARMA CONGRESS. Pharmacovigilance and Drug Safety: Assessing Future Regulatory and Compliance Developments. October 28, 2008
PHARMA CONGRESS October 28, 2008 Pharmacovigilance and Drug Safety: Assessing Future Regulatory and Compliance Developments Beverly H. Lorell, MD Senior Medical & Policy Advisor King & Spalding LLP Assessing
More informationA REVIEW OF MARKET ENTRY REQUIREMENTS FOR RISK MANAGEMENT, WITH SPECIAL EMPHASIS ON FDA AND ISO COMPLIANCE
BYLINED ARTICLE ON: A REVIEW OF MARKET ENTRY REQUIREMENTS FOR RISK MANAGEMENT, WITH SPECIAL EMPHASIS ON FDA AND ISO 14971 COMPLIANCE By Mark Leimbeck PE Underwriters Laboratories and Larry Kessler Sc.D.
More informationReal World Evidence Generation in the 21 st Century: National Evaluation System for health Technology (NEST)
Real World Evidence Generation in the 21 st Century: National Evaluation System for health Technology (NEST) Bill Murray, President & CEO IDEAL Conference Presentation May 5, 2017 1 www.mdic.org Vision
More informationCombination Products Coalition ( CPC ); Points to Consider in Drafting FDA s Co-development Guidance and Other Companion Diagnostic Guidances
Companion Diagnostics versus Combination Products 1 Under what circumstances is a companion diagnostic a combination product, and when isn t it a combination product? a) If a companion diagnostic is not
More informationImplications of the FDASIA 2012 Investigational Device Exemption Provisions
Implications of the FDASIA 2012 Investigational Device Exemption Provisions March 2013 Prepared by: Lakshman Ramamurthy Jenifer Levinson Elizabeth Guo Tanisha Carino Managing Access to Pseudoephedrine
More informationMCRA Clinical More Than Your Average CRO. Clinical Project Management. Site Management and Study Monitoring. Data Management. Auxiliary Services
MCRA s unique Clinical Research Organization (CRO) enables international and US-based orthopedic companies of all sizes to successfully execute a clinical study. Our philosophy is to streamline the clinical
More informationMedidée Services SA. Nano-Tera.ch. 05 February 2015 part 8. PMA, 510k, IDE. Pierre-Alain Sommer
Nano-Tera.ch 05 February 2015 part 8 PMA, 510k, IDE Pierre-Alain Sommer Pierre-alain.sommer@medidee.com www.medidee.com Nano-Tera 2015 05.02.2015 USA/FDA Pre Market Approval System - PMA, Pre Market Notifcation
More informationDraft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff
Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff Investigational Device Exemptions (IDE) for Early Feasibility Medical Device Clinical Studies, Including Certain First in Human (FIH)
More informationMedical Devices; Cardiovascular Devices; Classification of the Adjunctive Cardiovascular
This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 07/28/2017 and available online at https://federalregister.gov/d/2017-15901, and on FDsys.gov 4164-01-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN
More informationClinical Study Design for Medical Devices
Clinical Study Design for Medical Devices Greg Campbell, Ph.D. Director, Division of Biostatistics Center for Devices and Radiological Health U.S. Food and Drug Administration Kitasato-Harvard Symposium,
More informationRE: FDA-2011-N-0090: Food and Drug Administration; Unique Device Identification System
November 7, 2012 Margaret Hamburg Commissioner Food and Drug Administration Department of Health and Human Services Room 2217 White Oak Building One 10903 New Hampshire Avenue Silver Spring, MD 20993 RE:
More informationRegulatory challenges and opportunities for the use of Real World Evidence for drug registration and labelling
Presentation title Date 1 Regulatory challenges and opportunities for the use of Real World Evidence for drug registration and labelling Marianne Bork Samuelsen, Msc Pharm Regulatory Affairs Novo Nordisk
More informationUse of Real-World Evidence to Support Regulatory Decision-Making for Medical Devices
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 Use of Real-World Evidence to Support Regulatory Decision-Making for Medical Devices Draft Guidance
More informationMurray Sheldon, MD Associate Director for Technology and Innovation Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) Office of the Center Director
Murray Sheldon, MD Associate Director for Technology and Innovation Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) Office of the Center Director The National Academies Innovation Policy Forum September
More informationUS Regulatory and Marketing Barriers for Medical Devices
US Regulatory and Marketing Barriers for Medical Devices September 8, 2015 Zvi Ladin, Ph.D. Principal Boston MedTech Advisors Boston Germany Israel 1 Regulatory Barriers Market Barriers (providers / payers)
More informationA Path from RWD to RWE Stopping Over at Statistical Inference
A Path from RWD to RWE Stopping Over at Statistical Inference ASA Biopharmaceutical Section Regulatory-Industry Statistics Workshop 2018 Scott Snyder, PhD Director, Statistics and Data Science Cook Research
More informationRole of the WHO IVD Prequalification Programme in Light of National Regulatory Authority Approval
Role of the WHO IVD Prequalification Programme in Light of National Regulatory Authority Approval UN Prequalification of Medicines, Diagnostics and Vaccines 6 th Consultative Stakeholder Meeting 4 April
More informationMedical Devices; Gastroenterology-Urology Devices; Classification of the Endoscopic
This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 06/14/2018 and available online at https://federalregister.gov/d/2018-12794, and on FDsys.gov 4164-01-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN
More informationDisclosures. Laboratory Stakeholders. IVD vs. LDT. FDA Regulation of Laboratory Developed Tests 10/2/2015. FDA Regulation of LDTs
Disclosures FDA Regulation of Laboratory Developed Tests Beaumont Health System, 24 th Annual Symposium on Molecular Pathology September 16, 2015 Roger D. Klein, MD JD Director, Molecular Pathology Clinical
More informationOPC. The Use of Objective Performance Criteria in Medical Device Trials: An Industry perspective. David Breiter Boston Scientific CRM
OPC The Use of Objective Performance Criteria in Medical Device Trials: An Industry perspective David Breiter Boston Scientific CRM FDA/Industry Workshop, 2006 1 Outline What is an OPC Trial designs, benefits,
More informationINVESTIGATIONAL DEVICES & DRUGS. What is an IRB to do?
INVESTIGATIONAL DEVICES & DRUGS What is an IRB to do? What is a medical device? An instrument, apparatus, implement, machine, contrivance, implant, or in vitro diagnostic reagent Recognized in the official
More informationScott Gottlieb, MD Commissioner of Food and Drugs Food and Drug Administration New Hampshire Avenue Silver Spring, MD 20993
July 31, 2018 Scott Gottlieb, MD Commissioner of Food and Drugs Food and Drug Administration 10903 New Hampshire Avenue Silver Spring, MD 20993 RE: Medical Device Safety Action Plan: Protecting Patients,
More informationIntroduction to the FDA. Historical Context. Changes over Time FDA - BE-200 9/23/2004. Copyright C. S. Tritt, Ph.D. 1
Introduction to the FDA C. S. Tritt, Ph.D. October 21, 2003 Historical Context In the early 1900 s people were being ripped off, made sick and even killed by bad food, patent medicines and cosmetics with
More informationPresentation to: IOM Committee on Conflict of Interest in Medical Research, Education, and Practice. Medical Device Considerations
Presentation to: IOM Committee on Conflict of Interest in Medical Research, Education, and Practice Medical Device Considerations Paul Citron January 21, 2008 Paul Citron 2008 Preliminary Comments: Focus
More informationCollaboration for Research Integrity and Transparency
Collaboration for Research Integrity and Transparency A PROGRAM OF YALE LAW SCHOOL, YALE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AND YALE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH To: From: Collaboration for Research Integrity and Transparency
More informationThe Center for Devices and Radiological Health s Medical Device Innovation Initiative
The Center for Devices and Radiological Health s Medical Device Innovation Initiative May 2006 Over the next decade, medical technology innovations will fundamentally transform the health care and delivery
More informationExternal Defibrillator Improvement Initiative
External Defibrillator Improvement Initiative November 2010 Center for Devices and Radiological Health U.S. Food and Drug Administration External Defibrillator Improvement Initiative Table of Contents
More informationINNOVATIVE STATISTICAL DESIGN & ANALYSIS IN PD
INNOVATIVE STATISTICAL DESIGN & ANALYSIS IN PD Christopher S. Coffey Department of Biostatistics University of Iowa February 22, 2017 OVERVIEW The traditional approach to clinical trials tends to be large,
More informationU.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Regulatory Pathways for Medical Devices
Lisa L. Michels General Counsel & Regulatory Expert Susan J. Schniepp, Distinguished Fellow Regulatory Compliance Associates Inc. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Regulatory Pathways for Medical
More informationSWOG ONCOLOGY RESEARCH PROFESSIONAL (ORP) MANUAL STUDY PROTOCOL CHAPTER 14 REVISED: OCTOBER 2015
THE STUDY PROTOCOL The study protocol is a written document detailing how a clinical trial is conducted. The elements of a protocol include: 1. Trial design and organization; 2. Study objectives; 3. Background
More informationAtriCure Inc. Jonathan McElwee Regulatory Affairs Manger 7555 Innovation Way Mason, Ohio 45040
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Public Health Service Food and Drug Administration 10903 New Hampshire Avenue Document Control Center - WO66-G609 Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002 AtriCure Inc. Jonathan
More informationKey Activities. Ofer Reizes, Ph.D. Skills Development Director
Key Activities Ofer Reizes, Ph.D. Skills Development Director 1 Key Activities Core Question: What key activities required for your Value Propositions? Key Partners Key Activities Key Resources Value Proposition
More informationDe Novo Classification Process (Evaluation of Automatic Class III Designation) Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff
De Novo Classification Process (Evaluation of Automatic Class III Designation) Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff Document issued on October 30, 2017. The draft of this document
More informationCase for Product Quality Outcomes Analytics 26-October-2016
1 Case for Product Quality Outcomes Analytics 26-October-2016 2 Agenda o Who we are and how we fit into Case for Quality o What is quality? o Hypothesis and pilot journey o Key outcomes o Challenges and
More informationMedical Devices; Obstetrical and Gynecological Devices; Classification of the Closed Loop
This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 07/28/2017 and available online at https://federalregister.gov/d/2017-15892, and on FDsys.gov 4164-01-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN
More informationCurrent Issues in Device Development and Approval An Academic Perspec7ve
Current Issues in Device Development and Approval An Academic Perspec7ve Laura Mauri, MD, MSc Brigham and Women s Hospital Harvard Clinical Research Ins7tute Disclaimer The views and opinions expressed
More informationTechnical Guidance on Clinical Evaluation of Medical Devices
Annex Technical Guidance on Clinical Evaluation of Medical Devices I. Purpose The clinical evaluation of medical devices is the assessment procedure conducted by registration applicants to validate whether
More informationMeeting the Clinical Evaluation Requirements for CE Marking: Challenges for Innovative Start-ups Sarah Sorrel, MedPass International SAS
Meeting the Clinical Evaluation Requirements for CE Marking: Challenges for Innovative Start-ups Sarah Sorrel, MedPass International SAS TÜV SÜD America Clinical Workshop Carlsbad, CA - January 27, 2015
More informationCLINICAL LITERATURE REVIEWS: CHANGES IN THE EUROPEAN UNION S MEDICAL DEVICE DIRECTIVE REQUIRE MANUFACTURERS TO TAKE IMMEDIATE STEPS TO COMPLY
November 25, 2008 CLINICAL LITERATURE REVIEWS: CHANGES IN THE EUROPEAN UNION S MEDICAL DEVICE DIRECTIVE REQUIRE MANUFACTURERS TO TAKE IMMEDIATE STEPS TO COMPLY Written By Deborah Schenberger, Ph.D., Nerac
More informationPaths to Market & FDA Product Lifecycle Regulation. Patricia Kaeding Design of Medical Devices University of Minnesota April 14, 2005
Paths to Market & FDA Product Lifecycle Regulation Patricia Kaeding Design of Medical Devices University of Minnesota April 14, 2005 FDA Organization U.S. Food & Drug Administration Headed by a Commissioner
More informationFDA Decisions for Investigational Device Exemption (IDE) Clinical Investigations
Draft Guidance for Industry, Clinical Investigators, Institutional Review Boards, and Food and Drug Administration Staff FDA Decisions for Investigational Device Exemption (IDE) Clinical Investigations
More informationContains Nonbinding Recommendations. Draft Not for Implementation
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Acceptance of Medical Device Clinical Data from Studies Conducted Outside the United States Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug
More informationStatement of the. Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions. Presented by. Augusto D. Pichard, MD, FSCAI. Before the
The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions 2400 N Street NW, Suite 604, Washington, DC 20037-1153 Main: 202.741.9854 Toll Free: 800.992.7224 Fax: 202.689.7224 E-mail: info@scai.org Statement
More informationMedical Device Development Tools. Draft Guidance for Industry, Tool Developers, and Food and Drug Administration Staff
Reprinted from FDA s website by Medical Device Development Tools Draft Guidance for Industry, Tool Developers, and Food and Drug Administration Staff DRAFT GUIDANCE This guidance document is being distributed
More informationGuide for Manufacturers and Sponsors on Clinical Investigations Carried Out in Ireland
Guide for Manufacturers and Sponsors on Clinical Investigations Carried Out in Ireland AUT-G0095-1 15 AUGUST 2014 This guide does not purport to be an interpretation of law and/or regulations and is for
More informationCDER Perspective: Challenges in Clinical Trials and the Path Forward
CDER Perspective: Challenges in Clinical Trials and the Path Forward Pharmaceutical Compliance Congress and Best Practices Forum November 3, 2011 Ann Meeker O Connell, MS, CCEP Associate Director (Acting),
More informationFebruary 15, Re: Docket No. FDA-2017-D-6159: Expedited Programs for Regenerative Medicine Therapies for Serious Conditions
February 15, 2018 Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305) Food and Drug Administration 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061 Rockville, MD 20852 Re: Docket No. FDA-2017-D-6159: Expedited Programs for Regenerative Medicine
More informationSummary of Provisions in 21 st Century Cures Act (H.R. 6) as passed by full House of Representatives, July 10, 2015
Pediatric-Specific Provisions Summary of Provisions in 21 st Century Cures Act (H.R. 6) as passed by full House of Representatives, July 10, 2015 Requires the NIH to complete a strategic plan, and in the
More informationRegulatory Assessment of Premarket Approval of Medical Devices in US and EU
Available online at www.ijpcr.com International Journal of Pharmaceutical and Clinical Research 2017; 9(4): 281-285 doi: 10.25258/ijpcr.v9i04.8534 ISSN- 0975 1556 Research Article Regulatory Assessment
More informationUniversity of California, Irvine Human Research Protections Standard Operating Policies and Procedures
University of California, Irvine Human Research Protections Standard Operating Policies and Procedures Policy Number: 41 Title: Investigational Drugs, Agents, and Biologics Date of Last of Revision: 07/28/2006;
More informationThe Role of the CRO in Effective Risk-Based Monitoring
New Whitepaper The Role of the CRO in Effective Risk-Based Monitoring The clinical trial industry is evolving. In an effort to improve participant safety and data integrity, regulators are encouraging
More informationPost market Surveillance ISO EU Medical Device Regulation
Post market Surveillance ISO13485 2016 EU Medical Device Regulation Patrick Caines, Ph.D. Baxter Healthcare 15 June 2017 Agenda Post market Regulatory Requirements ISO 13485 2016 Summary of key changes
More informationField trial with veterinary vaccine
١ Field trial with veterinary vaccine Saeedeh Forghani,, M.D. Clinical Trial and Ethics Department Human Health Management Deputy of Quality Assurance 89/4/2 ٢ ٣ Introduction: The efficacy and safety shall
More informationTREND 2 Accelerating Evidence
TREND 2 Accelerating Evidence ACCELERATING EVIDENCE Regulators around the world are creating policies and collaborations to test novel science and technology faster, understand the real-world impact of
More informationRegulatory Pathways. Devices vs. Drugs Are there roles for registries? John Laschinger, MD CDRH/ODE/DCD/SHDB
Regulatory Pathways Devices vs. Drugs Are there roles for registries? John Laschinger, MD CDRH/ODE/DCD/SHDB johnlaschinger@fda.hhs.gov 1 Disclosures and Disclaimer John C. Laschinger, M.D. I am a full
More informationEvolving Regulatory Pathways for Medical Devices FDLI Annual Conference Access materials at fdli.org/annual2018
Evolving Regulatory Pathways for Medical Devices CDRH Policy Perspective/Key Initiatives CDRH 2018-2020 Strategic Priorities Simplicity & Collaborative Communities Implementing statutory changes, Cures
More informationReimbursement Strategy for Companion Diagnostics:
Reimbursement Strategy for Companion Diagnostics: Emerging Models and Requirements Edward E. Berger, Ph.D. Larchmont Strategic Advisors Definition Companion diagnostic A diagnostic test used to predict
More informationIncorporating Virtual Patients into Clinical Studies
Incorporating Virtual Patients into Clinical Studies Adam Himes, Tarek Haddad, Medtronic Laura Thompson 1, Telba Irony 2, Rajesh Nair 1 1 CDRH / FDA, 2 CBER / FDA on behalf of MDIC working group colleagues:
More informationAn Introduction to the Worldwide Regulatory Framework for Medical Devices. Elizabeth Malo M.S., Director, Regulatory Affairs
An Introduction to the Worldwide Regulatory Framework for Medical Devices Elizabeth Malo M.S., Director, Regulatory Affairs Course Outline / Agenda» Overview Device Regulatory Framework» US/EU/Canada Premarket
More informationCRNs as Foundational Blocks of the National Evaluation System for Medical Devices: A Call to Action
CRNs as Foundational Blocks of the National Evaluation System for Medical Devices: A Call to Action Danica Marinac Dabic, MD, PhD Director, Division of Epidemiology Summary FDA Strategic Priorities: 2016
More informationBenefit-Risk Considerations for Medical Devices: A Panel Discussion. Tuesday, March 28, :00 4:15 pm ET
Benefit-Risk Considerations for Medical Devices: A Panel Discussion Tuesday, March 28, 2017 3:00 4:15 pm ET Panel Beverly Lorell, M.D. Moderator Senior Medical & Policy Advisor, FDA & Life Sciences Group,
More informationRecommendations for Strengthening the Investigator Site Community
Recommendations for Strengthening the Investigator Site Community October 2017 CTTI MISSION: To develop and drive adoption of practices that will increase the quality and efficiency of clinical trials
More informationStatus Report on Implementation
FDAAA Title VIII (PL( 110-85, Section 801) Expanded Clinical Trials Registry and Results Database Status Report on Implementation Theresa Toigo Director, FDA Office of Special Health Issues Ninth Annual
More informationEuropean Society of Cardiology Lessons learned from a decade of engagement
European Society of Cardiology Lessons learned from a decade of engagement Alan G Fraser Chairman, EU Regulatory Affairs Committee fraserag@cf.ac.uk Brussels 21 March 2018 The European Society of Cardiology
More informationMarch 19, Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305) Food and Drug Administration 5630 Fishers Lane Room 1061 Rockville, MD 20852
March 19, 2018 Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305) Food and Drug Administration 5630 Fishers Lane Room 1061 Rockville, MD 20852 RE: Docket No. FDA-2017-D-6765; Draft Guidance for Industry and Food
More informationPediatric Exclusivity and other Emerging Issues in Clinical Trials Management
Pediatric Exclusivity and other Emerging Issues in Clinical Trials Management Allyson Gage, PhD Associate Director, Forest Research Institute, NJ Magali Reyes, MD, PhD Clinical Director, J & J Pharmaceutical
More informationGood Clinical Practice (GCP) & Clinical Trial Registries
Good Clinical Practice (GCP) & Clinical Trial Registries The Fifth Annual Pharmaceutical Regulatory and Compliance Congress and Best Practice Forum November 14-17, 2004 Kate Maloney, RN, MS, CPHQ Manager,
More informationAgenda. - Introduction Howard Birndorf. - ASR Issues and the Draft ASR FAQ Guidance Patrick Balthrop
- Introduction Howard Birndorf Agenda - ASR Issues and the Draft ASR FAQ Guidance Patrick Balthrop - IVDMIA Issues and the Draft IVDMIA Guidance Randy Scott - Q&A and Discussion All Who Are We? - Emerging
More informationKey multiplicity concepts and principles addressed in the Draft Guidance: Multiple Endpoints in Clinical Trials
Key multiplicity concepts and principles addressed in the Draft Guidance: Multiple Endpoints in Clinical Trials Mohammad F. Huque, Ph.D. Office of Biostatistics OTS, CDER/FDA DIA Annual Meeting, Boston,
More informationOvercoming Statistical Challenges to the Reuse of Data within the Mini-Sentinel Distributed Database
September 5, 2012 September 5, 2012 Meeting Summary Overcoming Statistical Challenges to the Reuse of Data within the Mini-Sentinel Distributed Database With passage of the Food and Drug Administration
More informationCDRH Pilot Activities
CDRH Pilot Activities Cisco Vicenty Program Manager, Case for Quality 1 Office of Compliance, CDRH November 15, 2017 VCIP Voluntary Compliance Improvement Program Pilot Status Description: Assessment:
More informationPost Market Surveillance
Post Market Surveillance December 6 th, 2017 Michael Maier, Medidee Services Slide 1 Agenda Postmarket surveillance Postmarket clinical follow up (PMCF) Incident reporting What changes with MDR Slide 2
More informationRegulatory Perspective on the Value of Bayesian Methods
American Course on Drug Development and Regulatory Sciences Substantial Evidence in 21st Century Regulatory Science Borrowing Strength from Accumulating Data April 21, 2016 Regulatory Perspective on the
More informationWhile individually rare, orphan diseases are actually collectively common, with an OF ORPHAN DRUG DEVELOPMENT MEETING THE UNIQUE CHALLENGES
ELECTRONICALLY REPRINTED FROM JUNE 2017 CLINICAL TRIALS Rare Diseases: MEETING THE UNIQUE CHALLENGES OF ORPHAN DRUG DEVELOPMENT BY MICHAEL F. MURPHY, MD, Ph D While individually rare, orphan diseases are
More informationOPTIMAL USE PROGRAM DRUG Therapeutic Review Framework and Process
OPTIMAL USE PROGRAM DRUG Therapeutic Review Framework and Process Version: 3.0 Publication Date: June 27, 2018 Report Length: 16 Pages Revision History From time to time, CADTH may amend the therapeutic
More information29 August Dear Sir/Madam:
29 August 2016 Directorate General for Health and Food Safety DG SANTE Unit B4 "Medical products Quality, Safety and Innovation" European Commission F101 08/058 B-1049 Brussels RE: Public consultation
More informationMedical Devices; General and Plastic Surgery Devices; Classification of the Hemostatic Device
This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 10/19/2018 and available online at https://federalregister.gov/d/2018-22784, and on govinfo.gov 4164-01-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
More informationSubmission of comments on COMMISSION NOTICE ON THE APPLICATION OF ARTICLES 3, 5 AND 7 OF REGULATION (EC) NO 141/2000 ON ORPHAN MEDICINAL PRODUCTS
Ref. Ares(2016)807620-16/02/2016 15 February 2016 Submission of comments on COMMISSION NOTICE ON THE APPLICATION OF ARTICLES 3, 5 AND 7 OF REGULATION (EC) NO 141/2000 ON ORPHAN MEDICINAL PRODUCTS Response
More informationTo document the review procedures for a submission regarding compassionate/treatment use of investigational drugs, biologics and devices.
UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD COMPASSIONATE/TREATMENT USE OF MEDICAL DRUGS, BIOLOGICS AND DEVICES I. PURPOSE To document the review procedures for a submission
More informationMonitoring Guidelines for Non-interventional Studies
Monitoring Guidelines for Non-interventional Studies NIS Considerations We all know that monitoring is key to ensure patient safety and data quality However, non-interventional studies (NIS) are not randomised
More informationYour complimentary Clinica Medtech Intelligence content
Your complimentary Clinica Medtech Intelligence content Clinica provides you with up to the minute coverage and opinion on company, product, market and regulatory developments as well as market size, growth
More informationMEDICAL DEVICES ISSUE
MEMBER MAGAZINE WWW..ORG MARCH/APRIL 2017 Food and Drug Law Institute MEDICAL DEVICES ISSUE IN THIS ISSUE LDTs: The Saga Continues 4 Factors to Consider Before Submitting a De Novo Request 10 Intellectual
More informationGuidance for Sponsors, Institutional Review Boards, Clinical Investigators and FDA Staff
Guidance for Sponsors, Institutional Review Boards, Clinical Investigators and FDA Staff Guidance on Informed Consent for In Vitro Diagnostic Device Studies Using Leftover Human Specimens that are Not
More informationFinancial Conflict of Interest (FCOI) and Human Subjects Research: Opportunities and Challenges in the Device World
Financial Conflict of Interest (FCOI) and Human Subjects Research: Opportunities and Challenges in the Device World Harry Greenberg, M.D. Senior Associate Dean of Research Director Of Spectrum Harry Greenberg,
More informationUnpacking Expanded Access to Investigational Drugs and Biologics
Unpacking Expanded Access to Investigational Drugs and Biologics When All Else Fails Richard Klein Office of Health and Constituent Affairs Food and Drug Administration September 13, 2016 FDA Drug Approval
More informationPostmarket Safety Surveillance: A Medical Device Perspective
Postmarket Safety Surveillance: A Medical Device Perspective Thomas P. Gross, MD, MPH Deputy Director, Postmarket Science Office of Surveillance and Biometrics Center for Devices and Radiological Health
More informationRe: Comments on January 2017 Draft Guidance: Considerations in Demonstrating Interchangeability with a Reference Product (Docket No.
800 17th Street, NW Suite 1100, Washington, DC 20006 May 1, 2017 Dr. Stephen Ostroff Acting Commissioner Food and Drug Administration 10903 New Hampshire Avenue Silver Spring, MD 20993 Re: Comments on
More informationData Monitoring Committee Initiative A PROPOSED APPRENTICESHIP MODEL FOR PREPARING NEW CANDIDATES FOR DMC SERVICE
Data Monitoring Committee Initiative A PROPOSED APPRENTICESHIP MODEL FOR PREPARING NEW CANDIDATES FOR DMC SERVICE A PROPOSED APPRENTICESHIP MODEL FOR PREPARING NEW CANDIDATES FOR DMC SERVICE OBJECTIVE:
More informationRAPID Phase 1 Deliverables Use Cases, Flow Diagrams
RAPID Phase 1 Deliverables Use Cases, Flow Diagrams James E. Tcheng, MD Duke Clinical Research Institute Durham, NC RAPID Think Tank 14 September 2016 1 Use Cases: Background & Rationale Why Use Cases?
More informationMedical Device Classification
Medical Device Classification The Key to Getting a Product on the Market with thanks to... David A. Pettenski, Supervisory Investigation Goals Understand why there is a medical device classification system
More information