The European Union and the U.S. have wrapped up a data privacy framework that covers broad swaths of both economies, including the transmission of clinical trial data across the Atlantic Ocean. Drug and device makers that want to make use of this framework and thus jettison the contractual clause to ensure data privacy may find compliance with this new framework much more efficient in the long run, but will have to do a lot of compliance work on the front end to achieve those efficiencies.
The European Union’s Medical Device Regulation (MDR) and In Vitro Diagnostic Regulation (IVDR) each allow a hospital to develop a device or an in vitro diagnostic for use solely in that hospital, but there is no regulatory free pass despite the lack of commercial intent. While the latest guidance on these in-house tests acknowledges that the hospital must determine the degree to which it must comply with the relevant regulation, any hospital that makes and uses an in-house diagnostic or device must develop a risk management mechanism for that device or diagnostic, not an easy lift for entities that may be glancingly familiar at best with conventional regulatory schemes.
The European Commission (EC) has proposed to extend compliance deadlines under the Medical Device Regulation (MDR) to 2027 for high-risk devices and to 2028 for low- and moderate-risk devices, seemingly providing some critical breathing room for manufacturers and patients alike. However, the proposal requires that manufacturers have an application on file for their legacy device by May 2024, suggesting that manufacturers will still face a crippling backlog in obtaining contracts with notified bodies to process these applications.
The European Union’s (EU) Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act) drew a fair amount of criticism when it was first released, but Team-NB, the association of notified bodies (NBs) for the EU, has weighed in with some less than flattering observations. The group’s position paper on the legislation said that the act would not only up-classify some artificial intelligence algorithms to a higher risk class but would also resurrect the backlog of applications because of burdensome new requirements for NBs, thus exacerbating an existing crisis of med tech availability in the EU.
The European Union’s efforts to update its regulatory framework for medical devices was heralded as a long-overdue response to the Poly Implant Prothèse (PIP) breast implant scandal, but the COVID-19 pandemic added significant drag to the implementation timelines. Those timelines have proven impracticable for other reasons as well and the problem will bleed into the new year and perhaps beyond to the detriment of patients and manufacturers.
EU health ministers have warned that developers of medical devices face trouble ahead in meeting deadlines for implementing the two new key regulations for medical devices (MDR) and in vitro diagnostics (IVDR). These were planned to enter into force in May 2021 and May 2022 respectively. EU executives and stakeholders have now all accepted that delays in complying with the regulations could result in issues achieving certification for medical devices, threatening shortages in the market.
It’s a delicate time in Europe, where the recovery from the pandemic has been stifled by the war on its doorstep in Ukraine. Although the crisis caused by the Russian invasion is dominating the short-term political agenda, there are serious concerns about Europe’s long-term economic prospects and whether its research-led industries are falling by the wayside.
Companies in the device and diagnostics spaces are familiar with how government agencies react to acquisitions that bolster the acquiring company’s product pipeline, but vertical mergers provoke a different set of regulatory concerns. The European Commission (EC) recently updated its guidelines for vertical agreements, a development that could hamper some EU corporate activity going forward.
As a growing roster of nations moves to protect individual genomic and other health data in the name of privacy under the General Data Protection Regulation in the EU and similar laws elsewhere, chief aggregators of such data, drug developers, are struggling.
As a growing roster of nations moves to protect individual genomic and other health data in the name of privacy under the General Data Protection Regulation in the EU and similar laws elsewhere, chief aggregators of such data, drug developers, are struggling.
