The Cove Business Standards Discussion Forums
New 510k requirements for Change in Indications for Use
UL - Underwriters Laboratories - Health Sciences
New 510k requirements for Change in Indications for Use
New 510k requirements for Change in Indications for Use
New 510k requirements for Change in Indications for Use
New 510k requirements for Change in Indications for Use
New 510k requirements for Change in Indications for Use
New 510k requirements for Change in Indications for Use
New 510k requirements for Change in Indications for Use
New 510k requirements for Change in Indications for Use
New 510k requirements for Change in Indications for Use
Go Back   The Elsmar Cove Business Systems and Standards Discussion Forums > > > >
Forum Username

Elsmar Cove Forum Visitor Notice(s)

Wooden Line

New 510k requirements for Change in Indications for Use


Monitor the Elsmar Forum
Sponsor Links




Courtesy Quick Links


Links Elsmar Cove visitors will find useful in the quest for knowledge and support:

Jennifer Kirley's
Conway Business Services


Howard's
International Quality Services


Marcelo Antunes'
SQR Consulting, and
Medical Devices Expert Forum


Bob Doering
Bob Doering's Blogs and,
Correct SPC - Precision Machining


Ajit Basrur
Claritas Consulting, LLC



International Standards Bodies - World Wide Standards Bodies

AIAG - Automotive Industry Action Group

ASQ - American Society for Quality

International Organization for Standardization - ISO Standards and Information

NIST's Engineering Statistics Handbook

IRCA - International Register of Certified Auditors

SAE - Society of Automotive Engineers

Quality Digest

IEST - Institute of Environmental Sciences and Technology


Some Related Topic Tags
indications for use, 510(k)
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rating: Thread Rating: 1 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
  Post Number #1  
Old 7th November 2012, 06:04 PM
robert.beck

 
 
Total Posts: 45
Please Help! New 510k requirements for Change in Indications for Use

Hi there,

first some background .. am familiar with the guidance doc on when to submit a new 510k, have read the 2010 510k working group report which discussses intended use vs. indication for use. here is my question:

the device has an approved 510k from 2007. at that time it was developed as an adjunct to another medical device which is now becoming obsolete. the company that makes this device makes many other similar models, and so do its competitors.

we've made a new version which works better and even considering all of the changes for this new version, a new 510k is not needed. so from a technology, risk, materials, patient population, warnings, etc. a new 510k is not needed.

The intended use is not changing at all. But I would like to change the indications for use by removing the reference to specific model and brand of the device, substituting the general category of device but otherwise keeping the indications for use identical. the only possible way this changes the patient population is that the target market is increased numerically but not changed in terms of any definition of what an appropriate patient is.

I know that following the guidance document's flowchart literally results in having to file a new 510k. however, I think this is a minor change. the guidance document also states that "any change in the indications for use that limits use to within the currently cleared indication may occur without the submission of a 510(k)." The section of the guidance document that elaborates on the flowchart has this relevant statement:

"A1 Does the change affect the indications for use? .. any change in the indications for use that limits use to within the currently cleared indication may occur without the submission of a 510(k) .. If the expansion is to a population with similar demographics, diagnosis, prognosis, comorbidity and potential for complications as the original, then a new 510(k) is not ordinarily expected.

is it reasonable to document this but not file a new 510k? What's your opinion?

Last edited by robert.beck; 7th November 2012 at 06:12 PM.

Sponsored Links
  Post Number #2  
Old 8th November 2012, 10:20 AM
MIREGMGR

 
 
Total Posts: 3,685
Re: New 510k requirements for Change in Indications for Use

Quote:
In Reply to Parent Post by robert.beck View Post

change the indications for use by removing the reference to specific model and brand of the device, substituting the general category of device
While I appreciate that you've evaluated the technical risks, that sounds like a broadening to me.

I'd think that, even with a rationale as to how it's 100% assured that the "general category" can't be different in any significant respect from the original clearance-target, you'd be exposed to the FDA differing with your borderline judgment call.
Thanks to MIREGMGR for your informative Post and/or Attachment!
  Post Number #3  
Old 8th November 2012, 10:37 AM
Mondo 22

 
 
Total Posts: 86
Re: New 510k requirements for Change in Indications for Use

All,

If the brand name was to change on a product, would a new 510(k) or a change notification need to be submitted?

The indications for use shall stay the same.

Any other information on how this would affect other countries such as Australia, Canada and Japan would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Ray
  Post Number #4  
Old 9th November 2012, 06:48 PM
robert.beck

 
 
Total Posts: 45
Re: New 510k requirements for Change in Indications for Use

So you're saying this is a "borderline" question? Let's assume it is a broadening of the indication, but that the worst case for the "broadening" is more of the same. Let's focus on this statement from the guidance document, "if the expansion is to a population with similar demographics, diagnosis, prognosis, comorbidity and potential complications as the original, then a new 510k is not ordinarily expected."

What would be a good way to document that the expanded indication is still the same patient population, especially given that this is an OEM product and therefore there is no readily available direct usage data?
  Post Number #5  
Old 12th November 2012, 10:48 AM
MIREGMGR

 
 
Total Posts: 3,685
Re: New 510k requirements for Change in Indications for Use

Quote:
In Reply to Parent Post by robert.beck View Post

So you're saying this is a "borderline" question?
Yes, but notwithstanding your intended thread focus, my point had to do with the broadening from a specific reviewed device to a "category" of devices. If that "category" is less specifically defined than the reviewed filing, I think you might have a problem.

As to the "broadening of the indication":

Quote:
What would be a good way to document that the expanded indication is still the same patient population, especially given that this is an OEM product and therefore there is no readily available direct usage data?
Not having any usage data seems to me to be a high hurdle to clear. All that I could suggest would be that whatever definitive pathway you used in the original filing, you exactly follow that same pathway in explaining how you can be sure that the population has not significantly changed.
Thank You to MIREGMGR for your informative Post and/or Attachment!
Reply

Lower Navigation Bar
Go Back   The Elsmar Cove Business Systems and Standards Discussion Forums > > > >

Bookmarks



Visitors Currently Viewing this Thread: 1 (0 Registered Visitors (Members) and 1 Unregistered Guest Visitors)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Forum Search
Display Modes Rate Thread Content
Rate Thread Content:

Forum Posting Settings
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Emoticons are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Discussion Threads
Discussion Thread Title Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post or Poll Vote
New 510k required for a material change? WAF64 Other US Medical Device Regulations 9 8th June 2016 06:01 PM
New 510k for change to Intended Use - Prescription to OTC Bonebuilder 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 2 7th March 2013 06:53 PM
510K Checklist that considers every Design Change QACen 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 8 19th September 2012 10:11 PM
File a new 510k for change or not? deuce64 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 3 3rd February 2012 06:05 PM
Time for a Special 510k? Making a formulation change to an existing 510k Sarah San Diego 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 3 26th July 2007 12:49 PM



The time now is 06:33 PM. All times are GMT -4.
Your time zone can be changed in your UserCP --> Options.



Misc. Internal Links


NOTE: This forum uses "Cookies"
The Elsmar Cove web site and all content is owned by Rabbithash Corp. as of 1 MAY 2018.
Unlike Facebook and other properties such as Linkedin, We don't buy, sell, or "share" visitor information. Never have, Never will...
GDPR Compliant since 1996, keeping Marc's vision alive!