September 15, 2021

How to Establish the Competitive Landscape Within the Scientific Validity Report

how to establish the competitive landscape within the scientific validity report with the state of the art search

In this practical presentation, Dr. Sarah Chavez, presents a detailed outline of the State-of-the-Art search within the Performance Evaluation Report (PER). Additionally, she will distinguish between the purpose and scope of the state-of-the-art and the Competitor search. For example, the SLR approach, data screening, and data presentation will be addressed.

You will learn:

  • The importance of the SOA SLR for providing background and general information
  • How to establish acceptance criteria with data
  • How to assess the safety and performance of your IVD with a systematic approach to the Competitor SLR process

Who should watch the recording?

Those Regulatory, Quality and Clinical leaders and teams who develop, write, review or approve Performance Evaluation Reports for EU IVDR submission. Also, anyone interested in learning more about the competitive landscape within the Scientific Validity Report should attend.

Watch the recording!

Building a Solid Foundation for your PER to Support IVDR Readiness

Watch our recent webinar where we present an overview of the State of the Art section. Namely, we explain how it fits into the overall process of writing a successful, IVDR-compliant Performance Evaluation Report (PER). In addition, a complete readiness assessment and gap analysis will help you identify critical resources, feeder documents, and expertise needed establish your IVD as “state-of-the-art.” Ultimately, knowing what the Notified Body expects to see will help you avoid project delays and discover efficiencies in the SOA development process.

You will learn:

  • The importance of planning and preparation before you even begin to write the SOA
  • The complete outline of the SOA literature review and assessment process to understand “documentation” needs and what the Notified Body may be expecting to see as part of the Scientific Validity Report (SVR)
  • The potential impact  of incorrect/incomplete documents or processes

To watch the free webinar recording, State of the Art: Building a Solid Foundation for your PER to Support IVDR Readiness, click here.

Categories:
Do you like it?0
July 12, 2021

[FREE WHITE PAPER] Systematic Literature Review: How to Empower Data-Driven Decisions in Your Organization

Overview

This white paper is a companion piece to our popular webinar where we share our insights on using the Systematic Literature Review (SLR) to Empower Data-Driven Decisions in your Organization.

Every day, pharma and medical device companies need data from SLRs to inform, direct, and help drive their internal processes and decisions that move their companies forward. Of course, clinical literature is also required for compliance with global regulatory requirements. Conducting SLRs to search, screen, and extract data from published sources can present challenges to your team in terms of expertise (e.g., medical librarian), methodology, and resources. It takes trained people with the availability to screen, review, and analyze the literature.

Solution

Adopting a transparent, reproducible, and robust process for SLRs is essential to …

Download the rest of this white paper here.


Criterion Edge has the expertise and resources to do literature reviews for many types of documents. Ready for a free consult?

Categories:
Do you like it?0
March 10, 2020

How Can a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) Help Prevent Common Pitfalls in Meeting the Elementary Requirements of Clinical Evaluation for MEDDEV 2.7/1 revision 4 Clinical Evaluation Report (CER)?

Author: Suzanne Broussard

Checking off list on time

Performing a methodologically sound literature review in the early stages of product development, as well as in the later stages, can help reduce most of the inadequacies highlighted by the European Commission in section A6 of MEDDEV 2.7/1 revision 4.  Section A6 provides examples of studies that lack scientific validity for the demonstration of adequate clinical performance and/or safety.

Here are the seven areas highlighted in section A6 of MEDDEV 2.7/1 revision 4 that manufacturers tend to have the most problems in proving scientific validity:

(more…)
Categories:
Do you like it?0
February 19, 2020

Clearly Defining Measurable Safety and Performance Endpoints in Clinical Evaluation Reports (CER) is a Real Challenge for Medical Device Manufacturers

Author: Suzanne Broussard 

All medical devices sold in Europe must have a Clinical Evaluation Report (CER), and specific and measurable safety and performance endpoints are paramount for an acceptable CER. However, many small medical device manufacturers are struggling to adequately define and subsequently document measurable safety and performance endpoints, especially in the literature review, to support an evidence-based evaluation 

The newest regulations for medical devices, Medical Device Regulation (MDR) 2017/745 and MEDDEV 2.7/1 revision 4, set high standards for confirming safety and performance when using the device according to the manufacturer’s Instructions for UseRegulations under the old MDR and MEDDEV were not as demanding, and manufacturers are not accustomed to the current systematic process of CER evaluations.  

These relatively new requirements for clinical evaluation extend to manufacturers trying to get new products into the European market, as well as those that are already selling medical devices. Safety and performance are central components of the evidence-based evaluation process for obtaining and maintaining CE Marking for MDR 2017/745 and MEDDEV 2.7/1 rev 4, and medical device manufacturers are expected to be in full compliance by May 26, 2020*For manufacturers that already have products on the market, the CER must be updated throughout the product lifecycle.  

For more information on the role of CERs in obtaining CE Marking for legal marketing in the European Union (EU), see Criterion Edge’s article What role does the CER play in getting a Medical Device Approved for Marketing in the EU? 

Systematic literature reviews (SLRs) are a big part of the CER. The ultimate goal of the CER is to provide sufficient clinical evidence that the device achieves its intended purpose and is safe and effectiveMEDDEV 2.7/1 rev 4 Section 4 defines evidence-based as: 

  • Clinical studies: clinical data from clinical investigations of the device concerned; or 
  • Existing data: clinical investigation(s) or other studies reported in the scientific literature, or a similar device for which equivalence to the device in question can be demonstrated, or 
  • Clinical experience: published and/or unpublished reports on other clinical experience of either the device in question or a similar device for which equivalent to the device in question or a similar device for which equivalence to the device in question can be demonstrated.  

Note that this list is comprised primarily of endpoints that need to be generated by performing methodologically sound systematic literature reviews.

Clearly setting safety and performance objectives in the review of scientific literature proves to have its own special challenges. Conducting systematic literature reviews requires expertisepeople, and time 

  • The individual or team of evaluators should possess knowledge and expertise of research methodologies (including clinical investigation design and biostatistics), information management, regulatory requirements, and degree and experience equivalence (MEDEV 2.7/1 rev 4 Section 6.4) 
  • It is often difficult to find experienced personnel that meet all the requirements to perform the clinical evaluation. 
  • Performing systematic literature reviews takes time, lots of time! 

A systematic literature review is much different than an internetbased literature review for a scientific manuscript. It requires a clear and methodologically sound search strategy coupled with a robust literature search. Every decision needs to be documented. 

There are many circumstances in which using experts in some areas of CER preparation can fill in gaps where expertise may bneeded, or time is of the essenceTo determine if hiring a consulting expert to facilitate timely and expert CER development, ask your organization these questions. 

Does your team meet all the criteria for preparing the clinical evaluation?  

Does your team know how to document the methods used to generate systematic literature reviews?  

Are they familiar with what aspects to consider when determining relevance? 

Do they have the time to perform systematic literature reviews? 

* MDR deadline has been extended one year to May 26th, 2021

(more…)
Categories:
Do you like it?0