- News Home
12 December 2013 1:00 pm ,
Vol. 342 ,
The iconic 125-year-old Lick Observatory on Mount Hamilton near San Jose, California, is facing the threat of closure...
Recent results from the Curiosity Mars rover have helped scientists formulate a plan for the next phase of its mission...
A new, remarkably powerful drug that cripples the hepatitis C virus (HCV) came to market last week, but it sells for $...
In pretoothbrush populations, gumlines would often be marred by a thick, visible crust of calcium phosphate, food...
Evolutionary biologists have long studied how the Mexican tetra, a drab fish that lives in rivers and creeks but has...
Victorian astronomers spent countless hours laboriously charting the positions of stars in the sky. Such sky mapping,...
In an ambitious project to study 1000 years of sickness and health, researchers are excavating the graveyard of the now...
Stefan Behnisch has won awards for designing science labs and other buildings that are smart, sustainable, and...
- 12 December 2013 1:00 pm , Vol. 342 , #6164
- About Us
Panel Calls for Rewrite of Medical Device Rules
29 July 2011 2:10 pm
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) should scrap its current oversight strategy for medical devices and, with legislation from Congress if needed, create a new system to ensure that devices are safe and effective. That's the bottom line of a 246-page report from the Institute of Medicine (IOM) that was released today.
Since 1976, FDA has relied on what's called the "501(k) clearance process." It permits new devices on the market if the maker can prove they're "substantially equivalent" to devices already out there, in contrast to new drug applications, which generally get more stringent vetting. But in the last several years, a number of dangerous devices have sparked concern, including surgical mesh linked to infection and faulty artificial hips. In 2009, FDA asked IOM to review the way it handles medical devices.
The results are clear: In a press release, IOM said the 501(k) process "lacks the legal basis to be a reliable premarket screen of the safety and effectiveness of moderate-risk" devices. (High-risk devices get additional review.) The institute also urged FDA to improve its postmarketing surveillance of devices, to catch problems that may not have been obvious before approval.
What's next isn't clear. But in an unusual report in The New York Times earlier this week, Barry Meier described an "extraordinary campaign" by allies of the medical device industry to discredit the report. FDA says it will be accepting public comments on the report, to help it determine what to do next.