All Clarivate Analytics websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.

More information on our cookie policy.

BioWorld. Link to homepage.

/images/Cortellis_Flagship_Logo_TM_RGB_Color.png
  • BioWorld
  • BioWorld MedTech
  • BioWorld Asia
  • BioWorld Science
  • Data Snapshots
    • BioWorld
    • BioWorld MedTech
  • Special reports
    • Artificial intelligence
    • Coronavirus
    • Diagnosing and tracking COVID-19
    • Drugs to Watch 2020
    • The next pandemic
    • Premium reports
      • BioWorld Financings Reports
      • Disease Forecast Reports

BioWorld. Link to homepage.

  • Sign In
  • Sign Out
  • My Account
Subscribe
BioWorld - Friday, February 26, 2021
Home » Blogs » BioWorld MedTech Perspectives » The future of device regulations: the EU model or the FDA approach?

BioWorld MedTech Perspectives
BioWorld MedTech Perspectives RSS FeedRSS

BioWorld MedTech / CDRH / FDA

The future of device regulations: the EU model or the FDA approach?

May 7, 2012
By Mark McCarty
No Comments

The demise of the Global Harmonization Task Force as a regulator-plus-industry forum for harmonization – or “convergence,” as the cautiously optimistic like to say – was met with little more than silence from the trade associations, but one can be sure the off-the-record discussions were intense. Now with the International Medical Device Regulators Forum coming together, the time has come to ask what the future of international medical device regulation holds.

First let’s examine the obvious. The chatter about demonstrations of efficacy as a requirement for a CE mark has been going on for some time, and the flap over breast implants made by Poly Implant Prosthèse has generated quite a bit of support for tighter scrutiny of devices in Europe. The problems with metal-on-metal hip implants and electrophysiology leads have pushed this agenda, too.

One should bear in mind that elected officials have large patella tendons where such things are concerned, especially when the mainstream media coverage prompts calls from constituents. That has been true in the U.S. for decades and one suspects it is becoming more the case in Europe as well.

European Parliament getting nervous

Don’t believe me? Take a look at the recent vote by a committee of the European Parliament asking the European Commission to perform a more drastic recast of the Medical Device Directives than might have been planned. The Parliament’s April 26 statement includes the request that the Commission impose a system featuring “more stringent checks and product traceability” as well as “a pre-market authorization system” more robust than that in place now.

The statement also notes that the PIP predicament “has shown a malfunctioning at European and national levels, notably a lack of cooperation . . . and a lack of traceability of raw material used for medical devices.” The statement asserts further that the widely reported problems with metal-on-metal hip implants has demonstrated “a failure of the current system of certification of compliance . . . as well as of the controls of the notified bodies and their surveillance by national competent authorities.”

One might also bear in mind the lack of reaction to something said by FDA’s Bram Zuckerman, MD, at CRT 2012. He claimed FDA drives most of the literature on cardiovascular devices, explaining that trials for devices “usually are done frankly because there is an FDA” demanding those trials. He also remarked, “I have a hard time finding CE-mark trials in publications of the first order.” Nobody dissented, and there were quite a few people in the room who were in a position to argue if they disagreed.

Gravitas is great; gravity is better

My working hypothesis on this is ably reflected by the notion of a binary star. If you picture FDA’s and the EU’s regulatory paradigms as two stars orbiting each other – one heavier and more stationary, the other lighter and anything but dominant – it’s difficult to avoid the conclusion that FDA is the more massive of the two, with the obvious implications. Prefer a more complex model that incorporates non-EU initiatives? Perhaps you’d find a depiction of a solar system more to your liking, but I’d point out that the most massive object is always at the center.

Of course the details matter, but let’s not be confused about the overall direction. FDA still outweighs everyone else, and will almost always have its way in a close call. If anyone is going to move anyone else out of their spot in the firmament, it’s not the European Commission, Health Canada, China’s State Food and Drug Administration or anyone else. It’s FDA.

You must login or register in order to post a comment.

Report Abusive Comment

Popular Stories

  • Free access to BioWorld coronavirus articles

    BioWorld

    The articles in this collection are from BioWorld’s ongoing coverage of the COVID-19 coronavirus outbreak. Note that we have added three critical tables which are...

  • Seniors with wooden puzzle

    Cassava’s simufilam improves AD patients’ cognition, behavior

    BioWorld
    When Cassava Sciences Inc.’s president and CEO, Remi Barbier, opened up the interim analysis of the company’s open-label study for Alzheimer’s disease candidate...
  • Vaxart COVID-19 vaccine tablets

    Vaxart shares shaken despite apparently positive early data for oral COVID-19 vaccine

    BioWorld
    Vaxart Inc. investors who stuck by company shares Feb. 3 had to swallow a bitter pill – watching shares of the oral vaccine developer (NASDAQ:VXRT) fall 57.8% to...
  • IPO money

    Lucira Health launches $153M IPO

    BioWorld MedTech
    Infectious diseases diagnostics company Lucira Health Inc. launched an IPO of 9 million shares of common stock at $17 per share, for expected gross proceeds of...
  • Today's news in brief

    BioWorld
    BioWorld briefs for Feb. 25.
cortellis ad

BioWorld Premium

Enjoy extended coverage for the most complete market view with BioWorld, BioWorld MedTech, and BioWorld Asia in a single, easy to access subscription.

Subscribe
  • BioWorld
    • Today's news
    • Analysis and data insight
    • Clinical
    • Data Snapshots
    • Deals and M&A
    • Financings
    • Newco news
    • Opinion
    • Regulatory
    • Science
  • BioWorld MedTech
    • Today's news
    • Clinical
    • Data Snapshots
    • Deals and M&A
    • Financings
    • Newco news
    • Opinion
    • Regulatory
    • Science
  • BioWorld Asia
    • Today's news
    • Analysis and data insight
    • Australia
    • China
    • Clinical
    • Deals and M&A
    • Financings
    • Newco news
    • Regulatory
    • Science
  • BioWorld Science
    • About
    • Archives
    • Today's news
    • Search BioWorld Science
  • More
    • About
    • Archives
    • Article reprints and permissions
    • Contact us
    • Cookie policy
    • Copyright notice
    • Data methodology
    • Privacy policy
    • Share your news with BioWorld
    • Staff
    • Terms of use
A Clarivate Analytic solution. Link to Clarivate website.
Follow Us

Copyright ©2021. All Rights Reserved. Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing