Medtech Insight is part of Pharma Intelligence UK Limited

This site is operated by Pharma Intelligence UK Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 13787459 whose registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. The Pharma Intelligence group is owned by Caerus Topco S.à r.l. and all copyright resides with the group.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use. For high-quality copies or electronic reprints for distribution to colleagues or customers, please call +44 (0) 20 3377 3183

Printed By

UsernamePublicRestriction

A “Disastrous” Draft? Device Firms Take Issue With 510(k) Modifications Guidance

This article was originally published in The Gray Sheet

Executive Summary

Draft guidance on when to submit a 510(k) for a change to a previously cleared device could increase the number of submissions by two- or three-fold, device makers say. Some call for draft to be withdrawn.

You may also be interested in...



Updating Your Device In The EU? It Isn't Always Clear When You Need To Tell The Notified Body

In the EU, when do manufacturers need to tell notified bodies about an extension to their product line before placing the updated devices on the market? Is there a definitive answer, or is more clarity needed? Experts weigh in.

Industry Urges FDA To Distinguish Between 510(k) Modification Factors

Industry groups and companies said US FDA's August draft guidance is inappropriately intermixing two different standards for determining when a new 510(k) needs to be submitted for a device modification. Respondents to the draft guidance on 510(k) modifications are also looking for more clarity on FDA's expectations for companies to assess how cumulative changes to a device might trigger the need for a new submission. But overall, firms support the current draft more than the agency's abandoned 2011 attempt to revise its policy.

FDA Calls For Full Risk Reviews For Device Changes In 510(k) Modifications Draft

US FDA wants sponsors to complete risk-based assessments and thoroughly consider unintended outcomes of changes they make to already-cleared devices, says a new, highly anticipated draft guidance on 510(k) modifications. This is true whether alterations are made by manufacturers to improve safety or effectiveness, enhance labels, change technology or engineering, or to upgrade materials in a device.

Related Content

Topics

Latest News
See All
UsernamePublicRestriction

Register

MT030773

Ask The Analyst

Ask the Analyst is free for subscribers.  Submit your question and one of our analysts will be in touch.

Your question has been successfully sent to the email address below and we will get back as soon as possible. my@email.address.

All fields are required.

Please make sure all fields are completed.

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please enter a valid e-mail address

Please enter a valid Phone Number

Ask your question to our analysts

Cancel