Dataset Information

The FDA Review Process for Cardiac Medical Devices in Children: A Review for the Clinician.

ABSTRACT: Pediatric medical devices play a vital role in the treatment of children with cardiovascular disease. Most cardiac medical devices used in children today are used off-label where the risk-benefit of devices has not been well characterized. Pediatric medical devices face a variety of challenges to FDA approval related in large part to the small target population, heterogeneity of the patient population and ethical considerations of device testing in children. While relatively few cardiac devices have received FDA approval in children, the number of devices navigating the approval process successfully is growing. Most pediatric device approvals are being granted through the humanitarian device exemption (HDE) pathway, which is designed for rare diseases making it suitable for devices treating congenital heart disease. This review summarizes the FDA review process for pediatric medical devices as it continues to evolve in response to the unique challenges of understanding device performance in the pediatric population.

SUBMITTER: Almond CS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3363973 | biostudies-literature | 2012 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The FDA Review Process for Cardiac Medical Devices in Children: A Review for the Clinician.

Almond Christopher S CS

Progress in pediatric cardiology 20120327 2

Pediatric medical devices play a vital role in the treatment of children with cardiovascular disease. Most cardiac medical devices used in children today are used off-label where the risk-benefit of devices has not been well characterized. Pediatric medical devices face a variety of challenges to FDA approval related in large part to the small target population, heterogeneity of the patient population and ethical considerations of device testing in children. While relatively few cardiac devices ...[more]

PMID: 22661882

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMeeting increased regulatory requirements for clinical evaluation of medical devices marketed in Europe in accordance with the Medical Device Regulation (EU 2017/745) is challenging, particularly for high-risk devices used in children.MethodsWithin the CORE-MD project, we performed a scoping review on evidence from clinical trials investigating high-risk paediatric medical devices used in paediatric cardiology, diabetology, orthopaedics and surgery, in patients aged 0-21 years. We searched Medline and Embase from 1st January 2017 to 9th November 2022.ResultsFrom 1692 records screened, 99 trials were included. Most were multicentre studies performed in North America and Europe that mainly had evaluated medical devices from the specialty of diabetology. Most had enrolled adolescents and 39% of trials included both children and adults. Randomized controlled trials accounted for 38% of the sample. Other frequently used designs were before-after studies (21%) and crossover trials (20%). Included trials were mainly small, with a sample size <100 participants in 64% of the studies. Most frequently assessed outcomes were efficacy and effectiveness as well as safety.ConclusionWithin the assessed sample, clinical trials on high-risk medical devices in children were of various designs, often lacked a concurrent control group, and recruited few infants and young children.ImpactIn the assessed sample, clinical trials on high-risk medical devices in children were mainly small, with variable study designs (often without concurrent control), and they mostly enrolled adolescents. We provide a systematic summary of methodologies applied in clinical trials of medical devices in the paediatric population, reflecting obstacles in this research area that make it challenging to conduct adequately powered randomized controlled trials. In view of changing European regulations and related concerns about shortages of high-risk medical devices for children, our findings may assist competent authorities in setting realistic requirements for the evidence level to support device conformity certification.

Project description:ImportanceThe US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) evaluates high-risk medical devices such as cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), including pacemakers, implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, and cardiac resynchronization therapy devices, via the premarket approval (PMA) process, during which manufacturers submit clinical data demonstrating safety and effectiveness. Subsequent changes to approved high-risk devices are implemented via "supplements," which may not require additional clinical testing.ObjectiveTo characterize the prevalence and characteristics of changes to CIEDs made through the PMA supplement process.DesignUsing the FDA's PMA database, we reviewed all CIEDs approved as original PMAs or supplements from 1979 through 2012. For each supplement, we collected the date approved, type of supplement (panel-track, 180-day, real-time, special, and 30-day notice), and the nature of the changes. We calculated the number of supplements approved per PMA and analyzed trends relating to different supplement regulatory categories over time. For supplements approved via the 180-day regulatory pathway, which often involve significant design changes, from 2010-2012, we identified how often additional clinical data were collected.ResultsFrom 1979-2012, the FDA approved 77 original and 5829 supplement PMA applications for CIEDs, with a median of 50 supplements per original PMA (interquartile range [IQR], 23-87). Excluding manufacturing changes that do not alter device design, the number of supplements approved each year was stable around a mean (SD) of 2.6 (0.9) supplements per PMA per year. Premarket approvals remained active via successive supplements over a median period of 15 years (IQR, 8-20), and 79% of the 77 original PMAs approved during our study period were the subject of at least 1 supplement in 2012. Thirty-seven percent of approved supplements involved a change to the device's design. Among 180-day supplements approved from 2010-2012, 23% (15/64) included new clinical data to support safety and effectiveness.Conclusions and relevanceMany CIED models currently used by clinicians were approved via the PMA supplement process, not as original PMAs. Most new device models are deemed safe and effective without requiring new clinical data, reinforcing the importance of rigorous postapproval surveillance of these devices.

Project description:BackgroundDrugs and high-risk medical devices are increasingly likely to receive Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval through expedited pathways, which has implications for informed treatment consent (i.e., consent in clinical practice).ObjectiveTo obtain expert opinion about the clinical and ethical implications of the increasing availability of new drugs and devices approved through expedited development and regulatory review pathways.DesignQualitative study using individual semi-structured videoconference interviews.ParticipantsNational leaders in medicine, ethics, and law (n=12) with expertise in medical product regulation, payor policymaking, bioethics, physician practice, patient advocacy, public health expertise/advocacy, clinical trials, the pharmaceutical and device industry, institutional review board oversight, and real-world evidence.Main measuresPrincipal themes in 3 domains: expedited regulatory pathways, physician and patient understanding of and reliance on FDA approval, and informed treatment consent.Key resultsRespondents pointed out that more common use of expedited pathways translates to increased reliance on surrogate measures, some with uncertain clinical significance. While expedited development and review can have advantages, participants expressed worry that physicians were unaware when medical products were expedited and did not communicate about uncertainties in knowledge about new drug or device approvals effectively with patients. Many participants felt that informed treatment consent discussions about new drugs or devices should include some explanations of expedited pathways and use of surrogate measures.ConclusionsExperts identified advantages of expediting development and of FDA flexibility in applying its standards to new drugs and medical devices, but highlighted concerns that patients may not be adequately informed about the risks of shorter review times or about uncertainties in the evidence that result. There is a need to identify approaches to ensure effective clinical use of drugs and devices when approved through expedited pathways.

Dataset Information

The FDA Review Process for Cardiac Medical Devices in Children: A Review for the Clinician.

Publications

The FDA Review Process for Cardiac Medical Devices in Children: A Review for the Clinician.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets