Back to Explorer

Design Considerations for Pivotal Clinical Investigations for Medical Devices: Guidance for Industry, Clinical Investigators, Institutional Review Boards and FDA Staff

FinalCenter for Devices and Radiological Health11/07/2013

Description

This documentis intended to provide guidance to those involved in designing clinical studies intended to support pre-market submissions for medical devices and FDA staff who review those submissions. Although the Agency has articulated policies related to design of studies intended to support specific device types, and a general policy of tailoring the evidentiary burden to the regulatory requirement, the Agency has not attempted to describe the different clinical study designs that may be appropriate to support a device pre-market submission, or to define how a sponsor should decide which pivotal clinical study design should be used to support a submission for a particular device. This guidance document describes different study design principles relevant to the development of medical device clinical studies that can be used to fulfill pre-market clinical data requirements. This guidance is not intended to provide a comprehensive tutorial on the best clinical and statistical practices for investigational medical device studies.

Scope & Applicability

Product Classes

10
Therapeutic and aesthetic devices

One of two broad categories of medical devices addressed

Investigational Device

Medical device being tested in a clinical trial.; Medical devices intended for participants during the trial.

Comparator

A procedure or another medical product that serves to assess the level of performance of the investigational device.

Medical Device

FDA intends to assess device cybersecurity based on a number of factors; demonstrate or maintain its safety and effectiveness; ensuring cybersecurity has become essential to FDA’s ability to protect the public health; Cyber-resiliency capabilities for medical devices

Diagnostic Device

unique issues with adaptive study designs for diagnostic devices; heterogeneous in scope and include devices that may be invasive

Aesthetic Device

Devices intended to change visual appearance; device intended to provide a desired change in visual appearance

Therapeutic Device

rationale for adaptive study may differ from diagnostic devices

In Vitro Diagnostic Device

IVDs for emerging pathogens during a Section 564 declared emergency

Non-Significant Risk Device

Device studies that may not require an IDE submission to FDA; Devices that do not meet the definition of significant risk

Significant Risk Device

Devices requiring full IDE submission

Stakeholders

8
Clinical Investigators

Individuals responsible for monitoring and reporting protocol deviations

Clinical Investigator

Veterinarian responsible for selecting anesthetic regimens and conducting field studies

Advisory panel

FDA might present PMAs using PGs to the relevant advisory panel to obtain outside scientific counsel.

Third-party evaluators

Independent individuals recommended to be blinded to intervention assignment

Independent adjudication committee

Encouraged for evaluation of serious hepatic events

Institutional Review Boards

Bodies responsible for evaluating trial risks and benefits for pregnant participants.; IRBs experienced in this population may advise on compensation.

Sponsor

Entity responsible for submitting applications under section 524B

Institutional Review Board

Governs top dose in clinical studies

Regulatory Context

Attributes

8
Intended Use

Evidence of a new intended use based on communications

Type I error rate

Statistical parameter requiring strong control when testing multiple endpoints

Clinical equipoise

A PG might be considered for challenging patient populations or if there is no clinical equipoise for any control.

Type I error rates

Statistical parameter to be controlled when handling multiplicity issues

Variability

Sampling variability controlled by the sample size of the study.

Bias

Systematic errors introduced due to sampling or measurement.

Learning Curve

Time taken to master device use

Reasonable Assurance of Safety and Effectiveness

Standard for PMA approval

Identified Hazards

Hazards

10
False-Positive Results

Risk factor for diagnostic devices leading to unnecessary treatment

Bias

mitigate potential unwanted bias in learning or performance estimation

Reading order bias

When comparing two or more diagnostic assessments, the reader's interpretation is affected by memory.

Lead-time bias

Subjects who are screened with a diagnostic device can falsely appear to benefit from diagnostic testing.

Verification bias

Produced when frequency of application of the clinical reference standard depends on the investigational device results.

Selection Bias

A type of bias to be addressed in the study design; Evaluation of any potential biases such as information bias and selection bias.

False negative

Incorrect diagnostic result that can lead to subject harm

False positive

Incorrect diagnostic result that can lead to inappropriate management

Temporal bias

Bias inherent in the use of a historical control since groups are not concurrent

Placebo effect bias

Bias avoided by using a randomized group in a blinded study

Related CFR Sections (12)

Related Warning Letters (10)

  • Clinical Investigator

    Shirish M. Gadgeel, M.D.

    2025-09-09
  • Clinical Investigator

    Mark J. Savant, M.D

    2025-07-15
  • Bioresearch Monitoring Program/Institutional Review Board (IRB)

    United Health Products, Inc.

    2025-05-20
  • Clinical Investigator

    Americo F. Padilla, M.D.

    2025-03-25
  • Institutional Review Board (IRB)

    Armstrong County Memorial Hospital

    2024-11-05
  • Clinical Investigator

    Namita A. Goyal, M.D.

    2024-10-22
  • Institutional Review Board (IRB)

    Louisiana State University Health Science Center IRB

    2024-10-08
  • Bioresearch Monitoring Program/IRB

    Massachusetts Institute of Technology MIT

    2024-07-16
  • Clinical Investigator (Sponsor)

    Angela D. Ritter, M.D.

    2024-06-18
  • Institutional Review Board (IRB)

    New York State Psychiatric Institute IRB

    2024-03-26

See Also (8)

Design Considerations for Pivotal Clinical Investigations for Medical Devices: Guidance for Industry, Clinical Investigators, Institutional Review Boards and FDA Staff | Guideline Explorer | BioRegHub