{"title":"锱铢必较:生物相容性评估的证据权重框架。","authors":"Stephanie M. Street , Whitney V. Christian","doi":"10.1016/j.yrtph.2024.105590","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>ISO 10993-1:2018 describes evaluating the biocompatibility profile of a medical device from a risk-based approach. This standard details the battery of information that should be considered within the assessment of a device, including raw material composition data, manufacturing processes, and endpoint testing. The ISO 10993/18562 series requires worst-case assumptions and exposure scenarios to be used in the evaluation, which may result in an over-estimation of patient safety risk. Currently, biocompatibility assessments evaluate each data set independently, and the consequence of this individualized assessment of exaggerated inputs is potential false alarms regarding patient safety. To evaluate these safety concerns, the ISO standards indicate that professional judgement should be used to estimate patient risk but does not provide guidance on incorporating a holistic review of the data into the risk assessment. Recalibrating these worst-case data to evaluate them in a weight-of-evidence (WoE) approach may provide a more realistic data set to determine actual patient risk. This proposed WoE framework combines understanding data applicability with a method for gauging the strength of data that can provide additional support for the final safety conclusion. Using a WoE framework will allow risk assessors to contextualize the data and utilize it to comprehensively estimate patient safety.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":20852,"journal":{"name":"Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S027323002400031X/pdfft?md5=3b4084e5491dd16acdfcaf856a6930e9&pid=1-s2.0-S027323002400031X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Taring the scales: Weight-of-evidence framework for biocompatibility evaluations\",\"authors\":\"Stephanie M. Street , Whitney V. Christian\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.yrtph.2024.105590\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>ISO 10993-1:2018 describes evaluating the biocompatibility profile of a medical device from a risk-based approach. This standard details the battery of information that should be considered within the assessment of a device, including raw material composition data, manufacturing processes, and endpoint testing. The ISO 10993/18562 series requires worst-case assumptions and exposure scenarios to be used in the evaluation, which may result in an over-estimation of patient safety risk. Currently, biocompatibility assessments evaluate each data set independently, and the consequence of this individualized assessment of exaggerated inputs is potential false alarms regarding patient safety. To evaluate these safety concerns, the ISO standards indicate that professional judgement should be used to estimate patient risk but does not provide guidance on incorporating a holistic review of the data into the risk assessment. Recalibrating these worst-case data to evaluate them in a weight-of-evidence (WoE) approach may provide a more realistic data set to determine actual patient risk. This proposed WoE framework combines understanding data applicability with a method for gauging the strength of data that can provide additional support for the final safety conclusion. Using a WoE framework will allow risk assessors to contextualize the data and utilize it to comprehensively estimate patient safety.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20852,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S027323002400031X/pdfft?md5=3b4084e5491dd16acdfcaf856a6930e9&pid=1-s2.0-S027323002400031X-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S027323002400031X\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, LEGAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S027323002400031X","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, LEGAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
ISO 10993-1:2018描述了从基于风险的方法评估医疗器械的生物相容性概况。该标准详细说明了在评估器械时应考虑的一系列信息,包括原材料成分数据、制造工艺和终点测试。ISO 10993/18562 系列标准要求在评估中使用最坏情况假设和暴露情景,这可能会导致过高估计患者安全风险。目前,生物相容性评估对每组数据进行独立评估,这种对夸大输入进行个性化评估的结果可能会对患者安全造成误报。为评估这些安全问题,国际标准化组织的标准指出,应使用专业判断来估计患者风险,但并未提供将数据整体审查纳入风险评估的指导。重新校准这些最坏情况数据,以证据权重(WoE)方法对其进行评估,可为确定实际患者风险提供更真实的数据集。本建议的 WoE 框架将了解数据适用性与衡量数据强度的方法相结合,可为最终安全结论提供额外支持。使用 WoE 框架可让风险评估人员将数据背景化,并利用数据全面评估患者的安全性。
Taring the scales: Weight-of-evidence framework for biocompatibility evaluations
ISO 10993-1:2018 describes evaluating the biocompatibility profile of a medical device from a risk-based approach. This standard details the battery of information that should be considered within the assessment of a device, including raw material composition data, manufacturing processes, and endpoint testing. The ISO 10993/18562 series requires worst-case assumptions and exposure scenarios to be used in the evaluation, which may result in an over-estimation of patient safety risk. Currently, biocompatibility assessments evaluate each data set independently, and the consequence of this individualized assessment of exaggerated inputs is potential false alarms regarding patient safety. To evaluate these safety concerns, the ISO standards indicate that professional judgement should be used to estimate patient risk but does not provide guidance on incorporating a holistic review of the data into the risk assessment. Recalibrating these worst-case data to evaluate them in a weight-of-evidence (WoE) approach may provide a more realistic data set to determine actual patient risk. This proposed WoE framework combines understanding data applicability with a method for gauging the strength of data that can provide additional support for the final safety conclusion. Using a WoE framework will allow risk assessors to contextualize the data and utilize it to comprehensively estimate patient safety.
期刊介绍:
Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology publishes peer reviewed articles that involve the generation, evaluation, and interpretation of experimental animal and human data that are of direct importance and relevance for regulatory authorities with respect to toxicological and pharmacological regulations in society. All peer-reviewed articles that are published should be devoted to improve the protection of human health and environment. Reviews and discussions are welcomed that address legal and/or regulatory decisions with respect to risk assessment and management of toxicological and pharmacological compounds on a scientific basis. It addresses an international readership of scientists, risk assessors and managers, and other professionals active in the field of human and environmental health.
Types of peer-reviewed articles published:
-Original research articles of relevance for regulatory aspects covering aspects including, but not limited to:
1.Factors influencing human sensitivity
2.Exposure science related to risk assessment
3.Alternative toxicological test methods
4.Frameworks for evaluation and integration of data in regulatory evaluations
5.Harmonization across regulatory agencies
6.Read-across methods and evaluations
-Contemporary Reviews on policy related Research issues
-Letters to the Editor
-Guest Editorials (by Invitation)