AMERICAS | ASIA PACIFIC | EMEA Medical Devices: Concept to Commercialization How to avoid delays in getting your product cleared/approved by FDA Robert.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Building a Cradle-to-Grave Approach with Your Design Documentation and Data Denise D. Dion, EduQuest, Inc. and Gina To, Breathe Technologies, Inc.
Advertisements

Medical Device Software Development
Testing Medical Devices A Brief Overview © 2005 Max Cortner. Copying and distribution of this document is permitted in any medium, provided this notice.
Regulatory Pathway for Platform Technologies
Overview of FDA Device Regulations
"Determining the Regulatory Pathway to Market" Classification Heather S. Rosecrans Director, 510(k) Staff Office of Device Evaluation Center for Devices.
Strengthening the Medical Device Clinical Trial Enterprise
Pinhas (Peter) Dartal 01 June QA role in development of Percutaneous Aortic Valve prosthesis.
510k Submission Overview Myraqa, Inc. August 22, 2012.
Single Use Expanded Access IND/IDE: FDA and IRB Requirements Before and After Use IRB Webinar October 9,2014.
Medical Devices Approval Process
Entering the North American Market
Pre-Market and the QSR Presented by: Dawn Fernandes.
External Defibrillators: Recalls, Inspections, and the Quality System Regulation Melissa Torres Office of Compliance December 15, 2010.
Using EDC-Rave to Conduct Clinical Trials at Genentech
Harmonization of Standards for Assistive Technology (AT) Rory A. Cooper, Ph.D. Departments of Rehabilitation Science & Technology, and Bioengineering University.
The FDA Landscape AdvaMed September 2008 Judith K. Meritz
+ Medical Devices Approval Process. + Objectives Define a medical device Be familiar with the classification system for medical devices Understand the.
Classification of HLA Devices FDA Introduction & Background Sheryl A. Kochman CBER/OBRR/DBA.
Radiological Devices Advisory Committee Meeting November 18, 2009 John A. DeLucia iCAD, Inc.
FDA Regulation of Diagnostic Tests
Regulatory Overview.
MethodGXP The Solution for the Confusion.
1 THE UNIQUE ROLES OF IRB IN MEDICAL DEVICE CLINICALL TRIAL Chiu Lin, Ph.D. CITI, May, 2009 CITI, May, 2009.
Justina A. Molzon, MS Pharm, JD
The Regulatory Authority for Off-Label Promotion
FDA Regulatory review in Minutes: What Product Development Executives Need-to-Know. Specifically, frequent causes of recalls and related areas that investigators.
Prof. Moustafa M. Mohamed Vice dean Faculty of Allied Medical Science Pharos University in Alexandria Development and Regulation of Medical Products (MEDR-101)
Regulatory Problems Moderators: Eugene Chen and Michael Kochman, MD.
The Medical Device Pathway as a Legal Onramp for Futuristic Persons THE FUTURE T HE M EDICAL D EVICE P ATHWAY AS A L EGAL.
Industry Perspective on Challenges for Product Developers - Drugs Christine Allison, M.S., RAC Associate Regulatory Consultant, Global Regulatory Affairs.
Slide 1 of 22 Rob Packard, President 510(k) Project Management.
Development and Regulation of Medical Products (MEDR-101)
Product Development Chapter 6. Definitions needed: Verification: The process of evaluating compliance to regulations, standards, or specifications.
OIVD Workshop Premarket Notification (510(k)) April 22, 2003 Parklawn Building Rockville, MD Presented by Marjorie Shulman Premarket Notification Staff.
FDA Focus On Consumer Protection
How to Register A Foreign Medical Device. SFDA Approval Documents Preparation Translation Create a Chinese Registration Standard Safety Testing in an.
Humanitarian Use Devices September 23, 2011 Theodore Stevens, MS, RAC Office of Cellular, Tissue and Gene Therapies Center for Biologics Evaluation and.
QSR and GLP What exactly are these?.
Overview of FDA's Regulatory Framework for PET Drugs
Rules for Supporting Part 803 and Part 806 Decision Making Page 1 Establishing Rules for: Medical Device Reports (803) & Correction and Removal Reports.
Design Documentation Clint Kehres, Brian Krouse, Jenn Shafner.
Utah Life Science Summit Nov Phil Triolo, PhD RAC President, Phil Triolo and Associates LC.
UPCOMING CHANGES TO IN-VITRO DIAGNOSTICS (IVDs) AND LABORATORY DEVELOPED TESTS (LDTs) REGULATIONS Moj Eram, PhD November 5, 2015.
Radiology Advisory Panel Meeting Radiology Advisory Panel Meeting Computer-Assisted Detection (CADe) Devices Joyce M. Whang Deputy Division Director Radiological.
Auditing ISO Nancy Pasquan November Introductions I am….. You are….. And we are here to discuss: Auditing ISO Quality Systems for Medical.
Device regulations USA Dr Phil Warner. USA Regulations MEDICAL DEVICES Food, Drug & Cosmetics Act Medical Device Amendments of 1976 (and other things)
FDA DRUG APPROVAL FDA’s Lengthy Drug Approval Process in Twelve Steps Overview of the FDA Drug Approval Process Drug Developed June 13, 2016 | Emilia Varrone.
Digital Health Think Tank kick-off meeting June 14, 2016.
November 9, 2015 February 20, 2017 Using real world evidence – industry perspective Pma indication expansion Melissa hasenbank, phd Sr. Clinical Research.
Medical Device Software Development
Clinical trials for medical devices: FDA and the IDE process
Division of Cardiovascular Devices
U.S. FDA Center for Devices and Radiological Health Update
Premarket Notification 510(k) process
Jeff Shuren, MD, JD Center for Devices and Radiological Health U. S
The Information Professional’s Role in Product Safety
FDA’s IDE Decisions and Communications
The Current PMA Requirements
First-in-Man, First In The USA: What’s The Difference?
Medical Device Premarket Submission Challenges and the Effect of MDUFA IV Robin Fatzinger, RAC VP, Regulatory Affairs Aesculap
Benefits of US EFS: A Clinical Perspective
Medical Device Regulatory Essentials: An FDA Division of Cardiovascular Devices Perspective Bram Zuckerman, MD, FACC Director, FDA Division of Cardiovascular.
US Early Feasibility Studies (EFS)
FDA-CDRH in the Next Decade A Vision for Change
FDA Medical Device Approval Pathways
FDA 21 CFR Part 11 Overview June 10, 2006.
Implantable Medical Devices: Accelerating Standards Development to Streamline Regulation Joshua Price | August 2,
Linda M. Chatwin, Esq. RAC Business Manager, UL LLC
Medical Device Design and Development
Presentation transcript:

AMERICAS | ASIA PACIFIC | EMEA Medical Devices: Concept to Commercialization How to avoid delays in getting your product cleared/approved by FDA Robert Seiple, MS, MPM, RAC-US EMERGO | Senior Consultant, QA/RA 29 October 2015

AMERICAS | ASIA PACIFIC | EMEA Early product development

AMERICAS | ASIA PACIFIC | EMEA Proof of concept and strategic planning Is there a market for the device? Have other products been cleared/approved by FDA? Is US the right market to enter first? Maybe Europe? Is reimbursement critical to your success? Do you have financial resources to complete development & handle clinical or regulatory delays?

AMERICAS | ASIA PACIFIC | EMEA Overview of US FDA regulatory framework

AMERICAS | ASIA PACIFIC | EMEA Classification scheme Classification scheme in US (like EU, Canada & others, based on risk – primarily to user Class I– low risk, relatively few requirements – tongue depressors, etc. Class II – medium risk – very large number of products, most subject to 510(k) system. Class III – Higher Risk – most require PMA

AMERICAS | ASIA PACIFIC | EMEA Device companies (sponsor) must submit a 510(k) or PMA application Important that you understand which process you will need to go through! Huge implications for costs and time to approval – 510k <1 year; PMA – many years. If clinical trials are required, consider where & with whom you should conduct them. Completely different regulatory requirements Companies often run out of money  The regulatory roadmap

AMERICAS | ASIA PACIFIC | EMEA Marketing authorization under 510k (21CFR 807, subpart E) considers a product safe and effective IF the device can be determined to be “Substantially Equivalent” to a device already on the market. Poses a problem for innovators of lower risk devices Substantial Equivalence determined (primarily) by same intended use and similar technology. Clinical studies sometimes needed to demonstrate efficacy. Substantial equivalence

AMERICAS | ASIA PACIFIC | EMEA What is a predicate device? US FDA system based on predicate system of classification, not rule based like Europe or Canada Device similar to yours must have been “cleared” by FDA Innovative new devices go through De Novo or PMA process

AMERICAS | ASIA PACIFIC | EMEA FDA has a comprehensive database for finding the classification of your device and identifying predicates

AMERICAS | ASIA PACIFIC | EMEA How to search for predicate devices Tip: The FDA database is picky. Start with shortest and simplest search term for your device so you find all results. Narrow your results with more descriptive terms later.

AMERICAS | ASIA PACIFIC | EMEA Finding predicate device(s) Search 510k database for similar or competitor products …by business name (must be close match) …by product code – but not necessarily unique. …by device name (use simplest term, then refine) Once found, record CFR and product code references and uses these as search terms.

AMERICAS | ASIA PACIFIC | EMEA 510(k) or PMA? Vast majority of Class II devices require a 510(k) Most Class III require Pre Market Approval (PMA) FDA does not “approve” devices that go through the 510(k) process – they clear (authorize) them to the marketed in the US. FDA clears about 3,100 devices via the 510(k) process each year. Average clearance time via FDA internal review: 6 months FDA clears less than 40 new PMA devices each year

AMERICAS | ASIA PACIFIC | EMEA 510(k) issues to be aware of ‘Refuse to Accept’ – preliminary review, (off-the-clock) to determine if all the required elements of the 510(k) are present. Electronic submission – very specific requirements for document formatting, file conventions, etc. If not met, submission is refused Usability – a type of validation study used to demonstrate that intended user can use device properly. Risk Management – International standard for identifying & controlling risks (ISO 14971). Performance Standards – vary by product, Ex: ISO , 3 rd edition – Electrical Safety, ISO x, Biocompatibility, etc.

AMERICAS | ASIA PACIFIC | EMEA Medical device design controls

AMERICAS | ASIA PACIFIC | EMEA What are design controls? 21CFR – Manufacturers of specific Class I, all Class II or Class III devices will control (and document) design efforts. Nine specific elements to Design Control: Design Plan (project planning) Design Inputs Design Outputs Design Review (how many, when?)

AMERICAS | ASIA PACIFIC | EMEA Design controls – continued Design Verification Design Validation Design Transfer Design Changes (control of) All documented in the Design History File Source: FDA

AMERICAS | ASIA PACIFIC | EMEA When to start design control 21CFR820 is Quality System Regulation – mostly concerned with marketed device However, when does Device Design begin? Frequently, YEARS before marketing

AMERICAS | ASIA PACIFIC | EMEA 21 CFR Key parts you should read: Part Labeling Part 807 – Pre-Market Submission Part 812 – Investigational exemptions Part 820 – Quality System Regulation Part 830 – Unique Device ID Part 860 – Classification All available online or in Emergo app Emergo app

AMERICAS | ASIA PACIFIC | EMEA Questions? Please contact Robert Seiple EMERGO | Senior QA/RA Consultant Questions? Please contact Robert Seiple EMERGO | Senior QA/RA Consultant Thank you for your attention Downloadable PDF of US regulatory process available online at: