FDA 对颈椎椎弓根螺钉和侧方肿块螺钉的重新分类:监管历史案例研究

IF 2 4区 医学 Q4 MEDICAL INFORMATICS Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science Pub Date : 2024-04-15 DOI:10.1007/s43441-024-00654-1
Jonathan H. Sussman, Ahmed Albayar, Anissa Saylany, Bhargavi R. Budihal, Dominic Romeo, Jason Xu, Joshua Rosenow, Robert F. Heary, William C. Welch
{"title":"FDA 对颈椎椎弓根螺钉和侧方肿块螺钉的重新分类:监管历史案例研究","authors":"Jonathan H. Sussman, Ahmed Albayar, Anissa Saylany, Bhargavi R. Budihal, Dominic Romeo, Jason Xu, Joshua Rosenow, Robert F. Heary, William C. Welch","doi":"10.1007/s43441-024-00654-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The classification of medical devices by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) involves rigorous scrutiny from specialized panels that designate devices as Class I, II, or III depending on their levels of relative risk to patient health. Posterior rigid pedicle screw systems were first classified by the FDA in 1984 and have since revolutionized the treatment of many spine pathologies. Despite this early classification by the FDA, posterior cervical pedicle and lateral mass screws were not reclassified from unclassified to Class III and then to Class II until 2019, nearly 35 years after their initial classification. This reclassification process involved a decades-long interplay between the FDA, formal panels, manufacturers, academic leaders, practicing physicians, and patients. It was delayed by lawsuits and a paucity of data demonstrating the ability to improve outcomes for cervical spinal pathologies. The off-label use of thoracolumbar pedicle screw rigid fixation systems by early adopters assisted manufacturers and professional organizations in providing the necessary data for the reclassification process. This case study highlights the collaboration between physicians and professional organizations in facilitating FDA reclassification and underscores changes to the current classification process that could avoid the prolonged dichotomy between common medical practice and FDA guidelines.</p>","PeriodicalId":23084,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The FDA Reclassification of Cervical Pedicle and Lateral Mass Screws: A Case Study in Regulatory History\",\"authors\":\"Jonathan H. Sussman, Ahmed Albayar, Anissa Saylany, Bhargavi R. Budihal, Dominic Romeo, Jason Xu, Joshua Rosenow, Robert F. Heary, William C. Welch\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s43441-024-00654-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The classification of medical devices by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) involves rigorous scrutiny from specialized panels that designate devices as Class I, II, or III depending on their levels of relative risk to patient health. Posterior rigid pedicle screw systems were first classified by the FDA in 1984 and have since revolutionized the treatment of many spine pathologies. Despite this early classification by the FDA, posterior cervical pedicle and lateral mass screws were not reclassified from unclassified to Class III and then to Class II until 2019, nearly 35 years after their initial classification. This reclassification process involved a decades-long interplay between the FDA, formal panels, manufacturers, academic leaders, practicing physicians, and patients. It was delayed by lawsuits and a paucity of data demonstrating the ability to improve outcomes for cervical spinal pathologies. The off-label use of thoracolumbar pedicle screw rigid fixation systems by early adopters assisted manufacturers and professional organizations in providing the necessary data for the reclassification process. This case study highlights the collaboration between physicians and professional organizations in facilitating FDA reclassification and underscores changes to the current classification process that could avoid the prolonged dichotomy between common medical practice and FDA guidelines.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23084,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43441-024-00654-1\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICAL INFORMATICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43441-024-00654-1","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICAL INFORMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

美国食品和药物管理局(FDA)对医疗器械的分类涉及专门小组的严格审查,这些小组根据器械对患者健康的相对风险程度将器械指定为 I 级、II 级或 III 级。后方刚性椎弓根螺钉系统于 1984 年首次被 FDA 列入一类,自此以后,该系统彻底改变了许多脊柱病症的治疗方法。尽管 FDA 很早就对其进行了分类,但颈椎后路椎弓根螺钉和侧块螺钉直到 2019 年才从未分类重新分类为 III 类,然后又重新分类为 II 类,这距离最初的分类已经过去了近 35 年。这一重新分类过程涉及 FDA、正式专家组、制造商、学术带头人、执业医师和患者之间长达数十年的相互作用。由于诉讼和证明该药物能够改善颈椎病治疗效果的数据匮乏,这一过程被推迟了。早期采用者对胸腰椎椎弓根螺钉刚性固定系统的标示外使用帮助制造商和专业组织为重新分类过程提供了必要的数据。本案例研究强调了医生和专业组织在促进 FDA 重新分类方面的合作,并强调了对当前分类过程的改变,这种改变可以避免常见医疗实践和 FDA 指南之间长期存在的对立。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The FDA Reclassification of Cervical Pedicle and Lateral Mass Screws: A Case Study in Regulatory History

The classification of medical devices by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) involves rigorous scrutiny from specialized panels that designate devices as Class I, II, or III depending on their levels of relative risk to patient health. Posterior rigid pedicle screw systems were first classified by the FDA in 1984 and have since revolutionized the treatment of many spine pathologies. Despite this early classification by the FDA, posterior cervical pedicle and lateral mass screws were not reclassified from unclassified to Class III and then to Class II until 2019, nearly 35 years after their initial classification. This reclassification process involved a decades-long interplay between the FDA, formal panels, manufacturers, academic leaders, practicing physicians, and patients. It was delayed by lawsuits and a paucity of data demonstrating the ability to improve outcomes for cervical spinal pathologies. The off-label use of thoracolumbar pedicle screw rigid fixation systems by early adopters assisted manufacturers and professional organizations in providing the necessary data for the reclassification process. This case study highlights the collaboration between physicians and professional organizations in facilitating FDA reclassification and underscores changes to the current classification process that could avoid the prolonged dichotomy between common medical practice and FDA guidelines.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science
Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science MEDICAL INFORMATICS-PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
13.30%
发文量
127
期刊介绍: Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science (TIRS) is the official scientific journal of DIA that strives to advance medical product discovery, development, regulation, and use through the publication of peer-reviewed original and review articles, commentaries, and letters to the editor across the spectrum of converting biomedical science into practical solutions to advance human health. The focus areas of the journal are as follows: Biostatistics Clinical Trials Product Development and Innovation Global Perspectives Policy Regulatory Science Product Safety Special Populations
期刊最新文献
Efficiency of eSource Direct Data Capture in Investigator-Initiated Clinical Trials in Oncology. Mutagenic Azido Impurities in Drug Substances: A Perspective. Draft Guideline for Industry to Manage Drug Shortages in Japan. Unleashing the Power of Reliance for Post-Approval Changes: A Journey with 48 National Regulatory Authorities. A Comprehensive Framework for Evaluating the Value Created by Real-World Evidence for Diverse Stakeholders: The Case for Coordinated Registry Networks.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1