510k submission overview

24
Novartis Flu Kit Regulatory Discussion Presenter October XX, 2010 510k Submission Overview Myraqa, Inc. August 22, 2012

Upload: mora

Post on 24-Feb-2016

54 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

510k Submission Overview. Myraqa, Inc. August 22, 2012. About Myraqa, Inc. Myraqa is the leading IVD consulting firm Headquarters in Silicon Valley Clients include IVD manufacturers, pharma , clinical labs, investors and other industry stakeholders. About Myraqa, Inc. Team-Driven Success - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: 510k Submission Overview

Novartis Flu KitRegulatory Discussion

PresenterOctober XX, 2010

510k Submission OverviewMyraqa, Inc.August 22, 2012

Page 2: 510k Submission Overview

About Myraqa, Inc.

• Myraqa is the leading IVD consulting firm

• Headquarters in Silicon Valley• Clients include IVD

manufacturers, pharma, clinical labs, investors and other industry stakeholders

2

Page 3: 510k Submission Overview

About Myraqa, Inc.• Team-Driven Success

» We employ leading experts in IVD Regulatory, Quality, Clinical, Biostatistics, Development and Marketing

» Team approach best combines diverse expertise» Team members are employees, not contractors» All senior staff have at least 15 years of relevant

experience, most have considerably more

3

Page 4: 510k Submission Overview

What is a 510(k)?

• Premarket Notification• Section 510(k) of Federal Food, Drug, & Cosmetic

Act• 21 CFR 807 Subpart E• Marketing Clearance Application• Allows FDA to Determine Substantial Equivalence

(SE)• Classification process for a device

4

Page 5: 510k Submission Overview

What a 510(k) Is Not

• A Form• Establishment Registration• Device Listing• Premarket Approval (PMA)

5

Page 6: 510k Submission Overview

What is a Predicate?• An identification of the legally marketed device to

which the submitter claims equivalence. A legally marketed device to which a new device may be compared for a determination regarding substantial equivalence is: » a device that was legally marketed prior to May 28,

1976, » or a device which has been reclassified from class III to

class II or I (the predicate),» or a device which has been found to be substantially

equivalent through the 510(k) process;

6

Page 7: 510k Submission Overview

Regulatory Classes for Devices

Three Regulatory Classes (level of control based on risk):

• Class I – General Controls• Class II – General Controls, Special Controls and

Premarket Notification• Class III – General Controls and Premarket

Approval

7

Page 8: 510k Submission Overview

General Controls• Class I devices are subject to the least regulatory control

and are subject to “General Controls”• General controls include:

» Establishment Registration of companies which are required to register under 21 CFR 807.20, such as manufacturers, distributers, repackages and relabelers

» Medical Device Listing with FDA of devices to be marketed» Manufacturing devices in accordance with current Good

Manufacturing Practices (Quality System Regulation in 21 CFR 820)

» Labeling devices in accordance with labeling regulations in 21 CFR 801 or 908

» Submission of a premarket notification [510(k)] before marketing a device

8

Page 9: 510k Submission Overview

Special Controls

• May include special labeling requirements, mandatory performance standards and post-market surveillance

9

Page 10: 510k Submission Overview

510(k) Submission Required When?

• Introducing a device to the U.S. market for the first time

• Change in indications for use for a previously cleared device

• Making significant modification to a previously cleared device

10

Page 11: 510k Submission Overview

Who Must Submit a 510(k)?• Device Manufacturers• Specifications Developers• Repackagers who change device or its labeling• Relabelers who change the labeling- e.g., instructions

for use• Anyone who both manufactures & distributes• A company that distributes devices but does not

perform any of the other functions above is not required to submit a 510(k)

11

Page 12: 510k Submission Overview

Intended Use Statement

• FDA generally regulates devices according to the intended use – not the technology used to generate the information

• Intended use statement– includes a general description of diseases or conditions

that the device will diagnose, treat, prevent, cure, or mitigate including a description, where appropriate of the patient population for which the device intended (21 CFR Part 812.2)

12

Page 13: 510k Submission Overview

Systems Approach

• FDA takes a ‘systems approach’ to the regulation of devices and IVDs– Reagents, instruments, software – everything that is

needed to produce a diagnostic result must be included– Can utilize a partnership approach with parallel

submissions• Examples

– Affymetrix/Roche– CDC/Applied Biosystems

13

Page 14: 510k Submission Overview

Device Classifications• There are three classifications of devices

» Class I: Low Risk» Often 510(k) Exempt» General Controls

» Examples: General purpose reagents, Mass spectrometers» Class II: Moderate Risk

» Require 510(k) clearance before commercialization» General Controls + Special Controls (e.g., clinical testing)

» Class III: High Risk» Require Premarket Approval (PMA)» PMA inspection

Page 15: 510k Submission Overview

Contents of a 510(k)• Medical Device User Fee Cover Sheet• CDRH Premarket Review Submission Cover Sheet• Cover Letter• Intended Use / Indications for Use• 510(k) Summary• Truthful and Accurate Statement• Financial Certification or Disclosure Statements• Executive Summary

Page 16: 510k Submission Overview

Contents of a 510(k) (Cont)• Device Description

» Include all reagents and instruments used» This is where we give FDA the details on how our product works

• Proposed Labeling» Will include Package Insert or Operator’s Manual (Instructions for

Use)» Kit and component labeling

• Stability» Studies conducted and results (Real-Time)

• Software» Requirements outlined in Software Guidance document

Page 17: 510k Submission Overview

Contents of a 510(k) (Cont)• Performance Testing

» Analytical/bench testing – Often multiple studies» Animal testing (if required)» Clinical testing –external clinical sites (typically 3 site minimum)

» Approximately 10% of all 510(k)s» Important difference with the predicate device, e.g., new indication

for use or new technology» Must be collected under Investigational Device Exemption

Regulations (21 CFR Part 812)

17

Page 18: 510k Submission Overview

FDA 510(k) Review• FDA recently published Refuse to Accept Policy for 510(k)s, which

also includes administrative checklists for Traditional, Abbreviated and Special 510(k)s.

• Administrative Review» Administrative review will be completed within 15 days of receipt of 510(k) » Assessment of completeness of 510(k) not the quality of information

• The submitter will be notified in writing if the 510(k) was found administratively complete or incomplete. » If incomplete submitter has 30 days to respond to the RTA letter

» either provide the missing information or» request an extension request for up to 180 days from the date of the RTA

letter.» If complete FDA staff can begin the substantive

18

Page 19: 510k Submission Overview

FDA 510(k) Review• Substantive Review

» Review of content and quality of information submitted » FDA may request additional information/performance data to determine

substantial equivalence to the predicate» Reviewer requests by telephone, email or formal letter (from Doc

Center)» Clock stops by letter only» Submit additional information to Document Mail Center» 30 days to submit» May request an extension within 30 days of the request for additional

information» The request for extension should state the reason and time needed» The 510(k) may be deleted from the 510(k) tracking system if there is no

response to the request for additional information within 30 days of FDA’s request letter

19

Page 20: 510k Submission Overview

Substantial Equivalence (SE)Device is Substantially Equivalent to predicate if:

» Has the same intended use, and» Has the same technological characteristics as the

predicate device,• Or

» Has the same intended use, and» Has different technological characteristics and the

information in the 510(k): » Does not raise new questions of safety and effectiveness,

and» Demonstrates new device at least as safe and effective as

the predicate

20

Page 21: 510k Submission Overview

Not Substantially Equivalent (NSE)• There is no predicate device• Has a NEW intended use• Has different technological characteristics

compared to the predicate device and raises a new questions regarding safety and effectiveness » The NSE determination did not include data review and

will require PMA or De Novo

21

Page 22: 510k Submission Overview

Not Substantially Equivalent (NSE) (Cont)

• Does not demonstrate device is at least as safe and effective as the predicate » The NSE determination included data review and is

eligible for a new 510(k) with new data

• Approximately 3% are found NSE• Data is looked at last in the 510(k) regulatory

review process• FDA usually asks for additional information at

least once prior to determining the device is NSE for lack of data

22

Page 23: 510k Submission Overview

Key Take-Aways

• Review relevant FDA guidance documents and search the releasable 510(k) database» 510(k) summaries and decision summaries for similar

products• Use new RTA Checklist • Confirm regulatory pathway with FDA

» Pre-IDE or Pre-Submission Meetings

23

Page 24: 510k Submission Overview

Thank You

24