医疗器械相似性分析:医疗器械等效性监管的可行方法。

Jan Sündermann, Joaquin Delgado Fernandez, Rupert Kellner, Theodor Doll, Ulrich P Froriep, Annette Bitsch
{"title":"医疗器械相似性分析:医疗器械等效性监管的可行方法。","authors":"Jan Sündermann, Joaquin Delgado Fernandez, Rupert Kellner, Theodor Doll, Ulrich P Froriep, Annette Bitsch","doi":"10.1080/17434440.2024.2402027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study aims to facilitate the identification of similar devices for both, the European Medical Device Regulation (MDR) and the US 510(k) equivalence pathway by leveraging existing data. Both are related to the regulatory pathway of read across for chemicals, where toxicological data from a known substance is transferred to one under investigation, as they aim to streamline the accreditation process for new devices and chemicals.</p><p><strong>Research design and methods: </strong>This study employs latent semantic analysis to generate similarity values, harnessing the US Food and Drug Administration 510k-database, utilizing their 'Device Descriptions' and 'Intended Use' statements.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For the representative inhaler cluster, similarity values up to 0.999 were generated for devices within a 510(k)-predicate tree, whereas values up to 0.124 were gathered for devices outside this group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Traditionally, MDR equivalence involves manual review of many devices, which is laborious. However, our results suggest that the automated calculation of similarity coefficients streamlines this process, thus reducing regulatory effort, which can be beneficial for patients needing medical devices. Although this study is focused on the European perspective, it can find application within 510(k) equivalence regulation. The conceptual approach is reminiscent of chemical fingerprint similarity analysis employed in read-across.</p>","PeriodicalId":94006,"journal":{"name":"Expert review of medical devices","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Medical device similarity analysis: a promising approach to medical device equivalence regulation.\",\"authors\":\"Jan Sündermann, Joaquin Delgado Fernandez, Rupert Kellner, Theodor Doll, Ulrich P Froriep, Annette Bitsch\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17434440.2024.2402027\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study aims to facilitate the identification of similar devices for both, the European Medical Device Regulation (MDR) and the US 510(k) equivalence pathway by leveraging existing data. Both are related to the regulatory pathway of read across for chemicals, where toxicological data from a known substance is transferred to one under investigation, as they aim to streamline the accreditation process for new devices and chemicals.</p><p><strong>Research design and methods: </strong>This study employs latent semantic analysis to generate similarity values, harnessing the US Food and Drug Administration 510k-database, utilizing their 'Device Descriptions' and 'Intended Use' statements.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For the representative inhaler cluster, similarity values up to 0.999 were generated for devices within a 510(k)-predicate tree, whereas values up to 0.124 were gathered for devices outside this group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Traditionally, MDR equivalence involves manual review of many devices, which is laborious. However, our results suggest that the automated calculation of similarity coefficients streamlines this process, thus reducing regulatory effort, which can be beneficial for patients needing medical devices. Although this study is focused on the European perspective, it can find application within 510(k) equivalence regulation. The conceptual approach is reminiscent of chemical fingerprint similarity analysis employed in read-across.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94006,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Expert review of medical devices\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Expert review of medical devices\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17434440.2024.2402027\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert review of medical devices","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17434440.2024.2402027","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:本研究旨在通过利用现有数据,为《欧洲医疗器械法规》(MDR)和美国 510(k) 等效途径识别类似器械提供便利。这两项研究都与化学品的 "跨读 "监管途径有关,即把已知物质的毒理学数据转移到正在调查的物质上,目的是简化新设备和化学品的认证流程:本研究采用潜在语义分析法,利用美国食品和药物管理局 510k 数据库中的 "设备描述 "和 "预期用途 "声明生成相似性值:对于具有代表性的吸入器集群,510(k)-谓词树中的设备的相似性值高达 0.999,而该集群之外的设备的相似性值则高达 0.124:结论:传统上,MDR 等效需要对许多器械进行人工审核,非常费力。然而,我们的研究结果表明,相似性系数的自动计算简化了这一过程,从而减少了监管工作,这对需要医疗器械的患者是有益的。虽然这项研究侧重于欧洲的视角,但它也可应用于 510(k) 等效监管。这种概念方法让人联想到读取交叉中使用的化学指纹相似性分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Medical device similarity analysis: a promising approach to medical device equivalence regulation.

Background: This study aims to facilitate the identification of similar devices for both, the European Medical Device Regulation (MDR) and the US 510(k) equivalence pathway by leveraging existing data. Both are related to the regulatory pathway of read across for chemicals, where toxicological data from a known substance is transferred to one under investigation, as they aim to streamline the accreditation process for new devices and chemicals.

Research design and methods: This study employs latent semantic analysis to generate similarity values, harnessing the US Food and Drug Administration 510k-database, utilizing their 'Device Descriptions' and 'Intended Use' statements.

Results: For the representative inhaler cluster, similarity values up to 0.999 were generated for devices within a 510(k)-predicate tree, whereas values up to 0.124 were gathered for devices outside this group.

Conclusion: Traditionally, MDR equivalence involves manual review of many devices, which is laborious. However, our results suggest that the automated calculation of similarity coefficients streamlines this process, thus reducing regulatory effort, which can be beneficial for patients needing medical devices. Although this study is focused on the European perspective, it can find application within 510(k) equivalence regulation. The conceptual approach is reminiscent of chemical fingerprint similarity analysis employed in read-across.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Orphan and paediatric medical devices in Europe: recommendations to support their availability for on-label and off-label clinical indications. Medical device similarity analysis: a promising approach to medical device equivalence regulation. Delivery systems for transcatheter therapies of congenital heart disease. Evaluation and management of coronary artery disease in transcatheter aortic valve implantation candidates with severe aortic stenosis and coronary artery disease: technology and techniques. Transforming medical education: the impact of innovations in technology and medical devices.
×
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