Welcome to our new website! If this is the first time you are logging in on the new site, you will need to reset your password. Please contact us at raps@raps.org if you need assistance.
The site navigation utilizes arrow, enter, escape, and space bar key commands. Left and right arrows move across top level links and expand / close menus in sub levels. Up and Down arrows will open main level menus and toggle through sub tier links. Enter and space open menus and escape closes them as well. Tab will move on to the next part of the site rather than go through menu items.
The regulatory function is vital in making safe and effective healthcare products available worldwide. Individuals who ensure regulatory compliance and prepare submissions, as well as those whose main job function is clinical affairs or quality assurance are all considered regulatory professionals.
Share your knowledge and expertise with your regulatory peers by submitting an in-depth, evidence-based article focusing on key areas and emerging issues in the global regulatory landscape.
One of our most valuable contributions to the profession is the Regulatory Code of Ethics. The Code of Ethics provides regulatory professionals with core values that hold them to the highest standards of professional conduct.
Your membership opens the door to free learning resources on demand. Check out the Member Knowledge Center for free webcasts, publications and online courses.
Like all professions, regulatory is based on a shared set of competencies. The Regulatory Competency Framework describes the essential elements of what is required of regulatory professionals at four major career and professional levels.
RAPS Euro Convergence brings regulatory peers from the EU and worldwide together in one forum to gain insights and exchange ideas on the region's most pressing issues. Register today to attend 10-12 May 2021.
Registration is now open for RAPS Convergence 2021! Gather with the regulatory community 12-15 September for four days of learning, engagement, and excitement.
With contributions from more than 30 authors from seven countries, the new edition incorporates a global overview of the field and is designed to help you get the most out of your regulatory intelligence endeavors.
Regipedia is an interactive resource created to benefit RAPS members with 24/7 access to more than 2,300 regulatory terms.
Hear from leaders around the globe as they share insights about their experiences and lessons learned throughout their certification journey.
Posted 01 April 2014 | By Alexander Gaffney, RAC,
A new standard operating procedure (SOP) unveiled last week by the US Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) establishes how the agency plans to implement and update certain types of guidance documents.
Guidance documents are commonly used by FDA to indicate its specific interpretation of otherwise vague statutory requirements. While they almost never establish legally enforceable standards (though they can, such as if Congress directs FDA to pass a guidance containing certain requirements), they are nevertheless enormously influential.
While FDA's various centers release many guidance documents each year, there are two distinct types.
Under 21 CFR 10.115-FDA's Good Guidance Practices (GGP) regulation-FDA is required to use several types of guidance documents:
These guidance documents may also be issued in accordance with various time frames. In general, draft guidance documents are subject to a lengthy comment period, while final draft guidance documents may also be subject to a small period of delay (though not always).
There is, however, a third type of rarely used guidance document known as the "immediately-in-effect" guidance, reserved for Level 1 guidance documents. These guidances are reserved for when FDA needs to make an immediate change to protect public health. To borrow a phrase, they allow FDA to "shoot first and ask questions later," with the guidance remaining in effect while FDA then asks industry for ways to tweak it.
For medical device manufacturers, guidance documents can pose unique issues.
For example, a medical device manufacturer might have conducted extensive clinical trials on a high-risk (Class III) medical device according to the current guidance documents, and used data obtained from those trials to support a premarket application (PMA) to the agency. But after the submission of that application, FDA might decide that, based on a public health problem, it can no longer accept the type of data generated by the manufacturer.
Such changes introduce an enormous degree of regulatory uncertainty into the approval process, and can be ruinous for device manufacturers-especially small ones with small monetary reserves or market caps.
However, those changes are often necessary to protect consumers from dangerous devices or testing practices known to be insufficient. So how, then, can FDA protect consumers while still providing a degree of regulatory certainty for companies who faithfully follow its regulations and guidance documents?
The answer, it seems, is with immediately-in-effect (IIE) Level 1 guidance documents. In a 26 March 2014 Federal Register notice, FDA indicated that it has released a new SOP on the use of IIE guidance documents related to premarket data issues.
The new SOP will allow CDRH to "clarify and more quickly inform stakeholders when CDRH has changed its expectations relating to, or otherwise has new scientific information that could affect data submitted as part of an Investigation Device Exemption (IDE) or premarket submission," FDA wrote in its Register notice.
The changes, which will see CDRH speeding up its guidance documents, is being done in response to an August 2010 report in which the agency was advised to communicate meaningful changes to industry in a "meaningful and timely manner" using "more rapid tools for broad communication on regulatory matters."
At present, FDA said its practices are often implemented on a case-by-case basis, and a final guidance document may take more than a year to implement based on resource constraints within the agency.
Under the new policy, FDA will develop Level 1, IIE guidances if three criteria are met:
If these criteria are met, CDRH staff will meet with the Center Science Council (CSC) to brief the council and to explain why changes are both necessary and proper, and why a IIE guidance document is the best course of action.
FDA explained that these guidance documents will likely only be 1-3 pages and length-far shorter than the average guidance document, which tends to range between 8-12 pages in length, and can be much longer.
The change should, if FDA's theory is correct, permit companies to adjust their regulatory course earlier in the process, saving them time and money.
CDRH SOP: Level 1, Immediately in Effect Guidance Documents on Premarket Data Issues (FR)
Tags: Regulatory Uncertainty, IIE, SOP, GGP, Latest News, medical device
Regulatory Focus newsletters
All the biggest regulatory news and happenings.