On 23 March 2020, the Department of Health and Social Care (“DHSC”) issued a plea to technology companies to come up with digital support solutions for COVID-19. The DHSC is making £500,000 available, with funding of up to £25,000 per company. The challenge, named TechForce19, aims to increase community support for the elderly, vulnerable
Sarah Cowlishaw’s practice focuses on life sciences regulatory and commercial law for pharmaceutical, medical device, food, and consumer products. Her advice on general regulatory matters includes borderline determinations, food classifications, adverse event and other reporting obligations, manufacturing controls, and labeling and promotion. Ms. Cowlishaw also advises on regulatory aspects of corporate/commercial deals, particularly regulatory due diligence.
In this final instalment of our series of blogs on the European Commission’s plans for AI and data, announced on 19 February 2020, we discuss some potential effects on companies in the digital health sector. As discussed in our previous blog posts (here, here and here), the papers published by the European Commission cover broad concepts and apply generally — but, in places, they specifically mention healthcare and medical devices.
The Commission recognizes the important role that AI and big data analysis can play in improving healthcare, but also notes the specific risks that could arise given the effects that such new technologies may have on individuals’ health, safety, and fundamental rights. The Commission also notes that existing EU legislation already affords a high level of protection for individuals, including through medical devices laws and data protection laws. The Commission’s proposals therefore focus on addressing the gap between these existing rules and the residual risks that remain in respect of new technologies. Note that the Commission’s proposals in the White Paper on AI are open for public consultation until 19 May 2020.
The EU’s regulatory rules for medical devices are due to change on 26 May 2020, when the new Medical Device Regulation (“MDR”) comes into effect. The regime for in vitro diagnostic devices will change two years later from 26 May 2022 when the In Vitro Diagnostic Devices Regulation (“IVDR”) will apply.
In advance of these changes, the EU Medical Device Coordination Group (“MDCG”) has recently published guidance on the Qualification and Classification of Software in the MDR and IVDR (the “Guidance”).
The aim of the Guidance is to assist manufacturers with interpreting the new Regulations to assess whether their software meets the definition of a medical device or an in vitro diagnostic device (i.e., “qualification”); and if so, what regulatory class the software would fall under (i.e., “classification”).
The MDCG is a coordination group established under Article 103 of the MDR, comprising up to two medical device experts from each EU Member State. Its key functions include contributing to the development of guidance to ensure effective and harmonized implementation of the EU’s new medical device rules. The Guidance is not legally binding nor does it necessarily reflect the official position of the European Commission. However, given the MDCG’s important role in the regulatory landscape, the Guidance is likely to be highly persuasive.
Our clients increasingly apply agile product and business development methodologies when they are developing digital health solutions. “Ideation” is the part of that process and involves the rapid identification and creation of ideas for digital health solutions, which are then prototyped and tested. Covington has created a Top 10 Questions for Ideation of Digital Health…
On 13 August 2019, the European Commission opened a call for expression of interest to relaunch the eHealth Stakeholder Group with a view to supporting the “digital transformation of healthcare in the EU”. The eHealth Stakeholder Group was first launched in 2012 and in its first iteration (between 2012 and 2015), contributed to the development…
France’s medicines regulator, the Agence Nationale de Sécurité du Médicament et des Produits de Santé (ANSM), has released draft guidelines, currently subject to a public consultation, setting out recommendations for manufacturers designed to help prevent cybersecurity attacks to medical devices. Notably, the draft guidelines are the first instance of recommendations released by…
Following on from the Evidence Standards Framework for DHTs published in December 2018 (the Original Standards, as reported in our previous blog post, here), the UK’s National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recently published a newly updated version of the standards (the Updated Standards, available here).
On 15 February 2019, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and Heads of Medicines Agencies (HMA) published their Joint Big Data Taskforce’s summary report (available here) setting out recommendations for understanding the acceptability of evidence derived from ‘big data’ in support of the evaluation and supervision of medicines by regulators.
The Taskforce has sought to clarify the meaning of ‘big data’ within the medicines regulatory context, defining it within the report as: “extremely large datasets which may be complex, multi-dimensional, unstructured and heterogeneous, which are accumulating rapidly and which may be analysed computationally to reveal patterns, trends, and associations. In general big data sets require advanced or specialised methods to provide an answer within reliable constraints”.
The Taskforce was split into seven sub-groups, each focusing on different categories of datasets:
- Clinical trials and imaging;
- Observational (or ‘Real World’) data;
- Spontaneous adverse drug reports (ADR);
- Social media and mobile health;
- Bioanalytical ‘omics (with a focus on proteomics); and
- Data analytics (this work is ongoing and cuts across the above six sub-groups; a further report is expected in Q1 2019).
The sub-groups were each asked, amongst other thing, to characterise their respective datasets; consider the specific areas where big data usability and applicability may add value; assess the existing competencies and expertise present across the European regulatory network regarding the analysis and interpretation of big data; and provide a list of recommendations and a ‘Big Data Roadmap’.
On 8 October, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) published a report (available here) setting out the progress it has made towards applying a common data model (CDM) in Europe. The EMA defines a CDM as “a mechanism by which raw data are standardized to a common structure, format and terminology independently from any particular study in order to allow a combined analysis across several databases/datasets”. The report follows an EMA-hosted workshop in December 2017 to examine the opportunities and challenges of developing a CDM.
The report acknowledges that the use of ‘Real World Data’ (RWD) (data relating to patient health status or delivery of health care data that is routinely collected from sources other than clinical trials) has become an increasingly common source of evidence to support drug development and regulatory decision making for human medical use in Europe. However, Europe currently has no pan-European data network, despite the wealth of data generated through various national healthcare systems that provide access for all. Many multi-database studies currently performed are typically slow and still allow for substantial variability in the conduct of studies. Further, there are a growing number of innovative products that no longer align with customary drug development pathways. This may create uncertainty in their data packages required for authorization, and subsequent tension between facilitating earlier access for patients with limited treatment options against the requirement for proactive robust pharmacovigilance of medicines for wider clinical use across the product life cycle (the existing EMA Patient Registry Initiative addresses this need in part).…
Continue Reading EMA publishes “A Common Data Model for Europe? – Why? Which? How?” Workshop Report
On February 1, 2018, Covington’s Digital Health team hosted a webinar examining U.S. and EU regulatory issues for digital health associated with pharmaceuticals. Here are some key takeaways from that webinar:
- Neela Paykel from Proteus Digital Health, noted that “you need to think outside the box for how to engage, whether you’re a pharma company