Class I devices: must they have clinical data or clinical investigations?
This article was originally published in Clinica
Executive Summary
Manufacturers of class I devices are often perplexed over the issue of clinical data: is it required for regulatory purposes, even though the devices in question have been classed as low-risk? And should the devices also undergo clinical investigations, as with higher-risk devices? Or is it good commercial sense to produce strong clinical data, perhaps based on specifically-designed clinical investigations, anyway, to convince purchasers and would-be investors of the product's value?
You may also be interested in...
EU Experts Want One-Stop-Shop EU Governance That Mimics Best Of Other Jurisdictions
It may be blue sky thinking to surmise how a new EU medtech regulatory governance structure could evolve. But with change on the horizon, experts see exciting opportunities.
Second EU MDR Notified Body Designated In France
Four years after the designation of the first notified body in France under the Medical Device Regulation, AFNOR Certification has been named too.
EU Regulatory Experts Support Notified Bodies, But Argue For Greater Consistency
Notified bodies have been a pivotal part of the EU medtech regulatory system since it was first launched in the 1990s. Where might they fit within a new medtech regulatory governance structure? Panelists on a recent vodcast grappled with the question.