510(k) Data Debated In Comments On FDA Draft Guidance

Device companies say non-clinical data should be given more prominence in FDA guidance on benefit-risk factors to consider when determining substantial equivalence of 510(k) devices with different technological characteristics from a predicate. But a coalition of consumer groups argues that the draft guidance underplays the need for clinical data.

Disagreement between industry and consumer groups over the frequency that clinical trial data should form the basis of a 510(k) for a device with different technological characteristics from the predicate was evident in comments submitted on a recent FDA draft guidance.

Device companies say non-clinical data should be given more prominence in the final version of the guidance on benefit-risk factors to consider when determining substantial equivalence of 510(k) devices with...

Read the full article – start your free trial today!

Join thousands of industry professionals who rely on Medtech Insight for daily insights

  • Start your 7-day free trial
  • Explore trusted news, analysis, and insights
  • Access comprehensive global coverage
  • Enjoy instant access – no credit card required

More from Regulation

More from Policy & Regulation

FDA Rebukes Four Companies, Including One Overseas, For Procedural Failures

 

The US FDA’s device center sent warning letters to three domestic device manufacturers and one German firm for failing to adhere to protocol on several issues.

EU Finalizes Framework For Joint Clinical Assessments Of High-Risk Devices

 

Second submission window for joint scientific consultations on a procedure to help prepare for joint clinical assessments will open from 2 to 30 June 2025.

Get Ready For International Harmonization Before Approaching QMSR Deadline, Says Regulatory Expert

 

During MD&M East last week, regulatory consultant Darren Reeves reminded device manufacturers that the time to get ready to comply with the new Quality Management System Regulation is now.