FDA ‘Least Burdensome’ Guidance ‘Could Be Worse’: Attorney
Attorney Adrienne Lenz (Hyman, Phelps & McNamara) says that while industry may feel that under the FDA 2/5 final guidance on least burdensome provisions it is continually being asked for more information, data, and studies to support their devices, “the final guidance, by way of sharing examples where FDA has used least burdensome approaches, suggests that, in many cases, it could be worse.” Writing in her firm’s FDA Law Blog, Lenz says there are not many differences in the final guidance compared to the 12/2017 draft guidance.
“It can be a challenge for sponsors to know exactly what will be used in the regulatory decision making as the agency continues to request new and different information to establish a reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness or substantial equivalence,” Lenz writes. “For 510(k)s, sponsors are required to include a signed statement that no material fact has been omitted and thus, may question whether omission of a study they performed might be problematic even if it does not seem necessary for regulatory decision making.”
Additional examples of FDA’s use of least burdensome approaches have been added, according to Lenz. She also cites several additions to the final guidance that should be welcomed by industry, and notes that readers are encouraged to interact with the agency early on so as to develop least burdensome approaches, especially in situations where their device may have or may be perceived to have different risks.