Medical Devices; Radiology Devices; Classification of the Radiological Computer-Assisted Diagnostic Software for Lesions Suspicious for Cancer, 3540-3543 [2020-00497]
Download as PDF
3540
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 14 / Wednesday, January 22, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when
promulgated, does not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Environmental Review
The FAA has determined that the
actions of modifying the Lansing, MI,
Class C airspace area by amending the
effective hours to coincide with the
associated radar approach control
facility hours of operation, and
establishing Class D airspace at Capital
Region International Airport, MI when
the associated radar approach control
facility is not in operation, have no
potential to cause significant
environmental impacts. Therefore,
because these airspace actions do not
change the boundaries, altitudes, or
operating requirements of the Lansing,
MI, Class C airspace area, they have
been categorically excluded from further
environmental impact review in
accordance with the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and
its implementing regulations at 40 CFR
parts 1500–1508, and in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1F,
Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures, paragraph 5–6.5a, which
categorically excludes from further
environmental impact review,
rulemaking actions that designate or
modify classes of airspace areas,
airways, routes, and reporting points
(see 14 CFR part 71, Designation of
Class A, B, C, D, and E Airspace Areas;
Air Traffic Service Routes; and
Reporting Points). In accordance with
FAAO 1050.1F, paragraph 5–2 regarding
Extraordinary Circumstances, this
action has been reviewed for factors and
circumstances in which a normally
categorically excluded action may have
a significant environmental impact
requiring further analysis, and it is
determined that no extraordinary
circumstances exist that warrant
preparation of an environmental
assessment.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Airspace, Incorporation by reference,
Navigation (air).
The Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, the
Federal Aviation Administration
amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:
PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A,
B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND
REPORTING POINTS
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
1. The authority citation for part 71
continues to read as follows:
21 CFR Part 892
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103,
40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR,
1959–1963 Comp., p. 389.
§ 71.1
[Amended]
2. The incorporation by reference in
14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11D,
Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, dated August 8, 2019, and
effective September 15, 2019, is
amended as follows:
■
Paragraph 4000—Subpart C—Class C
Airspace.
*
*
AGL MI C
*
*
*
Lansing, MI [Amended]
Capital Region International Airport, MI
(Lat. 42°46′43″ N, long. 84°35′10″ W)
That airspace extending upward from the
surface to and including 4,900 feet MSL
within a 5-mile radius of Capital Region
International Airport; and that airspace
extending upward from 2,100 feet MSL to
and including 4,900 feet MSL within a 10mile radius of Capital Region International
Airport. This Class C airspace area is
effective during the specific dates and times
established in advance by a Notice to
Airmen. The effective date and time will
thereafter be continuously published in the
Chart Supplement.
*
*
*
*
*
Paragraph 5000—Subpart D—Class D
Airspace.
*
*
AGL MI D
*
*
*
Lansing, MI [New]
Capital Region International Airport, MI
(Lat. 42°46′43″ N, long. 84°35′10″ W)
That airspace extending upward from the
surface to and including 3,400 feet MSL
within a 5-mile radius of Capital Region
International Airport. This Class D airspace
area is effective during the specific dates and
times established in advance by a Notice to
Airmen. The effective date and time will
thereafter be continuously published in the
Chart Supplement.
*
*
*
*
*
Issued in Washington, DC, on January 15,
2020.
Scott M. Rosenbloom,
Acting Manager, Rules and Regulations
Group.
[FR Doc. 2020–00992 Filed 1–21–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:46 Jan 21, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Food and Drug Administration
[Docket No. FDA–2019–N–5610]
Medical Devices; Radiology Devices;
Classification of the Radiological
Computer-Assisted Diagnostic
Software for Lesions Suspicious for
Cancer
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
ACTION:
Final amendment; final order.
The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA or we) is
classifying the radiological computerassisted diagnostic (CADx) software for
lesions suspicious for cancer into class
II (special controls). The special controls
that apply to the device type are
identified in this order and will be part
of the codified language for the
radiological CADx software for lesions
suspicious for cancer’s classification.
We are taking this action because we
have determined that classifying the
device into class II (special controls)
will provide a reasonable assurance of
safety and effectiveness of the device.
We believe this action will also enhance
patients’ access to beneficial innovative
devices, in part by reducing regulatory
burdens.
DATES: This order is effective January
22, 2020. The classification was
applicable on July 19, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ryan Lubert, Center for Devices and
Radiological Health, Food and Drug
Administration, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 3574, Silver Spring,
MD, 20993–0002, 240–402–6357,
ryan.lubert@fda.hhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
I. Background
Upon request, FDA has classified the
CADx software for lesions suspicious for
cancer as class II (special controls),
which we have determined will provide
a reasonable assurance of safety and
effectiveness. In addition, we believe
this action will enhance patients’ access
to beneficial innovation, in part by
reducing regulatory burdens by placing
the device into a lower device class than
the automatic class III assignment.
The automatic assignment of class III
occurs by operation of law and without
any action by FDA, regardless of the
level of risk posed by the new device.
Any device that was not in commercial
distribution before May 28, 1976, is
E:\FR\FM\22JAR1.SGM
22JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 14 / Wednesday, January 22, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
automatically classified as, and remains
within, class III and requires premarket
approval unless and until FDA takes an
action to classify or reclassify the device
(see 21 U.S.C. 360c(f)(1)). We refer to
these devices as ‘‘postamendments
devices’’ because they were not in
commercial distribution prior to the
date of enactment of the Medical Device
Amendments of 1976, which amended
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FD&C Act).
FDA may take a variety of actions in
appropriate circumstances to classify or
reclassify a device into class I or II. We
may issue an order finding a new device
to be substantially equivalent under
section 513(i) of the FD&C Act to a
predicate device that does not require
premarket approval (see 21 U.S.C.
360c(i)). We determine whether a new
device is substantially equivalent to a
predicate by means of the procedures
for premarket notification under section
510(k) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C.
360(k)) and part 807 (21 CFR part 807).
FDA may also classify a device
through ‘‘De Novo’’ classification, a
common name for the process
authorized under section 513(f)(2) of the
FD&C Act. Section 207 of the Food and
Drug Administration Modernization Act
of 1997 established the first procedure
for De Novo classification (Pub. L. 105–
115). Section 607 of the Food and Drug
Administration Safety and Innovation
Act modified the De Novo application
process by adding a second procedure
(Pub. L. 112–144). A device sponsor
may utilize either procedure for De
Novo classification.
Under the first procedure, the person
submits a 510(k) for a device that has
not previously been classified. After
receiving an order from FDA classifying
the device into class III under section
513(f)(1) of the FD&C Act, the person
then requests a classification under
section 513(f)(2).
Under the second procedure, rather
than first submitting a 510(k) and then
a request for classification, if the person
determines that there is no legally
marketed device upon which to base a
determination of substantial
equivalence, that person requests a
classification under section 513(f)(2) of
the FD&C Act.
Under either procedure for De Novo
classification, FDA is required to
classify the device by written order
within 120 days. The classification will
be according to the criteria under
section 513(a)(1) of the FD&C Act.
Although the device was automatically
within class III, the De Novo
classification is considered to be the
initial classification of the device.
We believe this De Novo classification
will enhance patients’ access to
beneficial innovation, in part by
reducing regulatory burdens. When FDA
classifies a device into class I or II via
the De Novo process, the device can
serve as a predicate for future devices of
that type, including for 510(k)s (see 21
U.S.C. 360c(f)(2)(B)(i)). As a result, other
device sponsors do not have to submit
a De Novo request or premarket
approval application in order to market
a substantially equivalent device (see 21
U.S.C. 360c(i), defining ‘‘substantial
equivalence’’). Instead, sponsors can use
the 510(k) process, when necessary, to
market their device.
II. De Novo Classification
On April 7, 2017, Quantitative
Insights Inc. submitted a request for De
Novo classification of the QuantX. FDA
reviewed the request in order to classify
the device under the criteria for
classification set forth in section
513(a)(1) of the FD&C Act.
3541
We classify devices into class II if
general controls by themselves are
insufficient to provide reasonable
assurance of safety and effectiveness,
but there is sufficient information to
establish special controls that, in
combination with the general controls,
provide reasonable assurance of the
safety and effectiveness of the device for
its intended use (see 21 U.S.C.
360c(a)(1)(B)). After review of the
information submitted in the request,
we determined that the device can be
classified into class II with the
establishment of special controls. FDA
has determined that these special
controls, in addition to the general
controls, will provide reasonable
assurance of the safety and effectiveness
of the device.
Therefore, on July 19, 2017, FDA
issued an order to the requester
classifying the device into class II. In
this final order, FDA is codifying the
classification of the device by adding 21
CFR 892.2060.1 We have named the
generic type of device radiological
computer-assisted diagnostic (CADx)
software for lesions suspicious for
cancer, and it is identified as an image
processing device intended to aid in the
characterization of lesions as suspicious
for cancer identified on acquired
medical images such as magnetic
resonance, mammography, radiography,
or computed tomography. The device
characterizes lesions based on features
or information extracted from the
images and provides information about
the lesion(s) to the user. Diagnostic and
patient management decisions are made
by the clinical user.
FDA has identified the following risks
to health associated specifically with
this type of device and the measures
required to mitigate these risks in table
1.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
TABLE 1—RADIOLOGICAL CADX SOFTWARE FOR LESIONS SUSPICIOUS FOR CANCER RISKS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Identified risk
Mitigation measures
Incorrect lesion(s) characterization leading to false positive results may
result in incorrect patient management with possible adverse effects
such as unnecessary treatment, unnecessary additional medical imaging and/or unnecessary additional diagnostic workup such as biopsy.
Incorrect lesion(s) characterization leading to false negative results
may lead to complications, including incorrect diagnosis and delay in
disease management.
The device could be misused to analyze images from an unintended
patient population or on images acquired with incompatible imaging
hardware or incompatible image acquisition parameters, leading to
inappropriate diagnostic information being displayed to the user.
Certain design verification and validation activities identified in special
control (1) and Certain labeling information identified in special control (2).
1 FDA notes that the ‘‘ACTION’’ caption for this
final order is styled as ‘‘Final amendment; final
order,’’ rather than ‘‘Final order.’’ Beginning in
December 2019, this editorial change was made to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:46 Jan 21, 2020
Jkt 250001
Certain design verification and validation activities identified in special
control (1) and Certain labeling information identified in special control (2).
Certain design verification and validation activities identified in special
control (1) and Certain labeling information identified in special control (2).
indicate that the document ‘‘amends’’ the Code of
Federal Regulations. The change was made in
accordance with the Office of Federal Register’s
(OFR) interpretations of the Federal Register Act (44
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
U.S.C. chapter 15), its implementing regulations (1
CFR 5.9 and parts 21 and 22), and the Document
Drafting Handbook.
E:\FR\FM\22JAR1.SGM
22JAR1
3542
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 14 / Wednesday, January 22, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 1—RADIOLOGICAL CADX SOFTWARE FOR LESIONS SUSPICIOUS FOR CANCER RISKS AND MITIGATION MEASURES—
Continued
Identified risk
Mitigation measures
Device failure could lead to the absence of results, delay of results or
incorrect results, which could likewise lead to inaccurate patient assessment.
Certain design verification and validation activities identified in special
control (1) and Certain labeling information identified in special control (2).
FDA has determined that special
controls, in combination with the
general controls, address these risks to
health and provide reasonable assurance
of safety and effectiveness. In order for
a device to fall within this classification,
and thus avoid automatic classification
in class III, it would have to comply
with the special controls named in this
final order. The necessary special
controls appear in the regulation
codified by this order. This device is
subject to premarket notification
requirements under section 510(k) of the
FD&C Act.
At the time of classification,
radiological CADx software for lesions
suspicious for cancer are for
prescription use only. Prescription
devices are exempt from the
requirement for adequate directions for
use for the layperson under section
502(f)(1) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C.
352(f)(1)) and 21 CFR 801.5, as long as
the conditions of 21 CFR 801.109 are
met.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
III. Analysis of Environmental Impact
The Agency has determined under 21
CFR 25.34(b) that this action is of a type
that does not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on
the human environment. Therefore,
neither an environmental assessment
nor an environmental impact statement
is required.
IV. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This final order establishes special
controls that refer to previously
approved collections of information
found in other FDA regulations and
guidance. These collections of
information are subject to review by the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–3521). The
collections of information in the
guidance document ‘‘De Novo
Classification Process (Evaluation of
Automatic Class III Designation)’’ have
been approved under OMB control
number 0910–0844; the collections of
information in part 814, subparts A
through E, regarding premarket
approval, have been approved under
OMB control number 0910–0231; the
collections of information in part 807,
subpart E, regarding premarket
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:46 Jan 21, 2020
Jkt 250001
(ii) A detailed description of prespecified performance testing protocols
and dataset(s) used to assess whether
the device will improve reader
performance as intended.
(iii) Results from performance testing
protocols that demonstrate that the
device improves reader performance in
the intended use population when used
in accordance with the instructions for
use. The performance assessment must
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 892
be based on appropriate diagnostic
Medical devices, Radiation
accuracy measures (e.g., receiver
protection, X-rays.
operator characteristic plot, sensitivity,
specificity, predictive value, and
Therefore, under the Federal Food,
diagnostic likelihood ratio). The test
Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner dataset must contain sufficient numbers
of cases from important cohorts (e.g.,
of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR part 892 is
subsets defined by clinically relevant
amended as follows:
confounders, effect modifiers,
PART 892—RADIOLOGY DEVICES
concomitant diseases, and subsets
defined by image acquisition
■ 1. The authority citation for part 892
characteristics) such that the
continues to read as follows:
performance estimates and confidence
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 351, 360, 360c, 360e,
intervals of the device for these
360j, 360l, 371.
individual subsets can be characterized
for the intended use population and
■ 2. Add § 892.2060 to subpart B to read
imaging equipment.
as follows:
(iv) Standalone performance testing
§ 892.2060 Radiological computer-assisted protocols and results of the device.
diagnostic software for lesions suspicious
(v) Appropriate software
of cancer.
documentation (e.g., device hazard
(a) Identification. A radiological
analysis; software requirements
computer-assisted diagnostic software
specification document; software design
for lesions suspicious of cancer is an
specification document; traceability
image processing prescription device
analysis; and description of verification
intended to aid in the characterization
and validation activities including
of lesions as suspicious for cancer
system level test protocol, pass/fail
identified on acquired medical images
criteria, results, and cybersecurity).
such as magnetic resonance,
(2) Labeling must include:
mammography, radiography, or
(i) A detailed description of the
computed tomography. The device
patient population for which the device
characterizes lesions based on features
is indicated for use.
or information extracted from the
(ii) A detailed description of the
images and provides information about
intended reading protocol.
(iii) A detailed description of the
the lesion(s) to the user. Diagnostic and
patient management decisions are made intended user and recommended user
training.
by the clinical user.
(iv) A detailed description of the
(b) Classification. Class II (special
device inputs and outputs.
controls). The special controls for this
(v) A detailed description of
device are:
compatible imaging hardware and
(1) Design verification and validation
imaging protocols.
must include:
(vi) Warnings, precautions, and
(i) A detailed description of the image
limitations, including situations in
analysis algorithms including, but not
which the device may fail or may not
limited to, a detailed description of the
operate at its expected performance
algorithm inputs and outputs, each
level (e.g., poor image quality or for
major component or block, and
certain subpopulations), as applicable.
algorithm limitations.
notification submissions, have been
approved under OMB control number
0910–0120; the collections of
information in part 820, regarding the
quality system regulation, have been
approved under OMB control number
0910–0073; and the collections of
information in parts 801 and 809,
regarding labeling, have been approved
under OMB control number 0910–0485.
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\22JAR1.SGM
22JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 14 / Wednesday, January 22, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
(vii) Detailed instructions for use.
(viii) A detailed summary of the
performance testing, including: Test
methods, dataset characteristics, results,
and a summary of sub-analyses on case
distributions stratified by relevant
confounders (e.g., lesion and organ
characteristics, disease stages, and
imaging equipment).
Dated: January 9, 2020.
Lowell J. Schiller,
Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2020–00497 Filed 1–21–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 892
[Docket No. FDA–2019–N–5589]
Medical Devices; Radiology Devices;
Classification of the Radiological
Computer Aided Triage and
Notification Software
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
ACTION:
Final amendment; final order.
The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA or we) is
classifying the radiological computer
aided triage and notification software
into class II (special controls). The
special controls that apply to the device
type are identified in this order and will
be part of the codified language for the
radiological computer aided triage and
notification software’s classification. We
are taking this action because we have
determined that classifying the device
into class II (special controls) will
provide a reasonable assurance of safety
and effectiveness of the device. We
believe this action will also enhance
patients’ access to beneficial innovative
devices, in part by reducing regulatory
burdens.
DATES: This order is effective January
22, 2020. The classification was
applicable on February 13, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ryan Lubert, Center for Devices and
Radiological Health, Food and Drug
Administration, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 3574, Silver Spring,
MD 20993–0002, 240–402–6357,
ryan.lubert@fda.hhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
I. Background
Upon request, FDA has classified the
radiological computer aided triage and
notification software as class II (special
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:46 Jan 21, 2020
Jkt 250001
controls), which we have determined
will provide a reasonable assurance of
safety and effectiveness. In addition, we
believe this action will enhance
patients’ access to beneficial innovation,
in part by reducing regulatory burdens
by placing the device into a lower
device class than the automatic class III
assignment.
The automatic assignment of class III
occurs by operation of law and without
any action by FDA, regardless of the
level of risk posed by the new device.
Any device that was not in commercial
distribution before May 28, 1976, is
automatically classified as, and remains
within, class III and requires premarket
approval unless and until FDA takes an
action to classify or reclassify the device
(see 21 U.S.C. 360c(f)(1)). We refer to
these devices as ‘‘postamendments
devices’’ because they were not in
commercial distribution prior to the
date of enactment of the Medical Device
Amendments of 1976, which amended
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FD&C Act).
FDA may take a variety of actions in
appropriate circumstances to classify or
reclassify a device into class I or II. We
may issue an order finding a new device
to be substantially equivalent under
section 513(i) of the FD&C Act (21
U.S.C. 360c(i)) to a predicate device that
does not require premarket approval.
We determine whether a new device is
substantially equivalent to a predicate
by means of the procedures for
premarket notification under section
510(k) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C.
360(k)) and part 807 (21 CFR part 807).
FDA may also classify a device
through ‘‘De Novo’’ classification, a
common name for the process
authorized under section 513(f)(2) of the
FD&C Act. Section 207 of the Food and
Drug Administration Modernization Act
of 1997 established the first procedure
for De Novo classification (Pub. L. 105–
115). Section 607 of the Food and Drug
Administration Safety and Innovation
Act modified the De Novo application
process by adding a second procedure
(Pub. L. 112–144). A device sponsor
may utilize either procedure for De
Novo classification.
Under the first procedure, the person
submits a 510(k) for a device that has
not previously been classified. After
receiving an order from FDA classifying
the device into class III under section
513(f)(1) of the FD&C Act, the person
then requests a classification under
section 513(f)(2).
Under the second procedure, rather
than first submitting a 510(k) and then
a request for classification, if the person
determines that there is no legally
marketed device upon which to base a
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
3543
determination of substantial
equivalence, that person requests a
classification under section 513(f)(2) of
the FD&C Act.
Under either procedure for De Novo
classification, FDA is required to
classify the device by written order
within 120 days. The classification will
be according to the criteria under
section 513(a)(1) of the FD&C Act.
Although the device was automatically
within class III, the De Novo
classification is considered to be the
initial classification of the device.
We believe this De Novo classification
will enhance patients’ access to
beneficial innovation, in part by
reducing regulatory burdens. When FDA
classifies a device into class I or II via
the De Novo process, the device can
serve as a predicate for future devices of
that type, including for 510(k)s (see 21
U.S.C. 360c(f)(2)(B)(i)). As a result, other
device sponsors do not have to submit
a De Novo request or PMA in order to
market a substantially equivalent device
(see 21 U.S.C. 360c(i), defining
‘‘substantial equivalence’’). Instead,
sponsors can use the 510(k) process,
when necessary, to market their device.
II. De Novo Classification
On September 29, 2017, Viz.ai, Inc.,
submitted a request for De Novo
classification of the ContaCT. FDA
reviewed the request in order to classify
the device under the criteria for
classification set forth in section
513(a)(1) of the FD&C Act.
We classify devices into class II if
general controls by themselves are
insufficient to provide reasonable
assurance of safety and effectiveness,
but there is sufficient information to
establish special controls that, in
combination with the general controls,
provide reasonable assurance of the
safety and effectiveness of the device for
its intended use (see 21 U.S.C.
360c(a)(1)(B)). After review of the
information submitted in the request,
we determined that the device can be
classified into class II with the
establishment of special controls. FDA
has determined that these special
controls, in addition to the general
controls, will provide reasonable
assurance of the safety and effectiveness
of the device.
Therefore, on February 13, 2018, FDA
issued an order to the requester
classifying the device into class II. In
this final order, FDA is codifying the
classification of the device by adding 21
CFR 892.2080.1 We have named the
1 FDA notes that the ‘‘ACTION’’ caption for this
final order is styled as ‘‘Final amendment; final
E:\FR\FM\22JAR1.SGM
Continued
22JAR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 14 (Wednesday, January 22, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3540-3543]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-00497]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 892
[Docket No. FDA-2019-N-5610]
Medical Devices; Radiology Devices; Classification of the
Radiological Computer-Assisted Diagnostic Software for Lesions
Suspicious for Cancer
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Final amendment; final order.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is classifying
the radiological computer-assisted diagnostic (CADx) software for
lesions suspicious for cancer into class II (special controls). The
special controls that apply to the device type are identified in this
order and will be part of the codified language for the radiological
CADx software for lesions suspicious for cancer's classification. We
are taking this action because we have determined that classifying the
device into class II (special controls) will provide a reasonable
assurance of safety and effectiveness of the device. We believe this
action will also enhance patients' access to beneficial innovative
devices, in part by reducing regulatory burdens.
DATES: This order is effective January 22, 2020. The classification was
applicable on July 19, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ryan Lubert, Center for Devices and
Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 3574, Silver Spring, MD, 20993-0002, 240-402-6357,
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Upon request, FDA has classified the CADx software for lesions
suspicious for cancer as class II (special controls), which we have
determined will provide a reasonable assurance of safety and
effectiveness. In addition, we believe this action will enhance
patients' access to beneficial innovation, in part by reducing
regulatory burdens by placing the device into a lower device class than
the automatic class III assignment.
The automatic assignment of class III occurs by operation of law
and without any action by FDA, regardless of the level of risk posed by
the new device. Any device that was not in commercial distribution
before May 28, 1976, is
[[Page 3541]]
automatically classified as, and remains within, class III and requires
premarket approval unless and until FDA takes an action to classify or
reclassify the device (see 21 U.S.C. 360c(f)(1)). We refer to these
devices as ``postamendments devices'' because they were not in
commercial distribution prior to the date of enactment of the Medical
Device Amendments of 1976, which amended the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act).
FDA may take a variety of actions in appropriate circumstances to
classify or reclassify a device into class I or II. We may issue an
order finding a new device to be substantially equivalent under section
513(i) of the FD&C Act to a predicate device that does not require
premarket approval (see 21 U.S.C. 360c(i)). We determine whether a new
device is substantially equivalent to a predicate by means of the
procedures for premarket notification under section 510(k) of the FD&C
Act (21 U.S.C. 360(k)) and part 807 (21 CFR part 807).
FDA may also classify a device through ``De Novo'' classification,
a common name for the process authorized under section 513(f)(2) of the
FD&C Act. Section 207 of the Food and Drug Administration Modernization
Act of 1997 established the first procedure for De Novo classification
(Pub. L. 105-115). Section 607 of the Food and Drug Administration
Safety and Innovation Act modified the De Novo application process by
adding a second procedure (Pub. L. 112-144). A device sponsor may
utilize either procedure for De Novo classification.
Under the first procedure, the person submits a 510(k) for a device
that has not previously been classified. After receiving an order from
FDA classifying the device into class III under section 513(f)(1) of
the FD&C Act, the person then requests a classification under section
513(f)(2).
Under the second procedure, rather than first submitting a 510(k)
and then a request for classification, if the person determines that
there is no legally marketed device upon which to base a determination
of substantial equivalence, that person requests a classification under
section 513(f)(2) of the FD&C Act.
Under either procedure for De Novo classification, FDA is required
to classify the device by written order within 120 days. The
classification will be according to the criteria under section
513(a)(1) of the FD&C Act. Although the device was automatically within
class III, the De Novo classification is considered to be the initial
classification of the device.
We believe this De Novo classification will enhance patients'
access to beneficial innovation, in part by reducing regulatory
burdens. When FDA classifies a device into class I or II via the De
Novo process, the device can serve as a predicate for future devices of
that type, including for 510(k)s (see 21 U.S.C. 360c(f)(2)(B)(i)). As a
result, other device sponsors do not have to submit a De Novo request
or premarket approval application in order to market a substantially
equivalent device (see 21 U.S.C. 360c(i), defining ``substantial
equivalence''). Instead, sponsors can use the 510(k) process, when
necessary, to market their device.
II. De Novo Classification
On April 7, 2017, Quantitative Insights Inc. submitted a request
for De Novo classification of the QuantX. FDA reviewed the request in
order to classify the device under the criteria for classification set
forth in section 513(a)(1) of the FD&C Act.
We classify devices into class II if general controls by themselves
are insufficient to provide reasonable assurance of safety and
effectiveness, but there is sufficient information to establish special
controls that, in combination with the general controls, provide
reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness of the device for
its intended use (see 21 U.S.C. 360c(a)(1)(B)). After review of the
information submitted in the request, we determined that the device can
be classified into class II with the establishment of special controls.
FDA has determined that these special controls, in addition to the
general controls, will provide reasonable assurance of the safety and
effectiveness of the device.
Therefore, on July 19, 2017, FDA issued an order to the requester
classifying the device into class II. In this final order, FDA is
codifying the classification of the device by adding 21 CFR
892.2060.\1\ We have named the generic type of device radiological
computer-assisted diagnostic (CADx) software for lesions suspicious for
cancer, and it is identified as an image processing device intended to
aid in the characterization of lesions as suspicious for cancer
identified on acquired medical images such as magnetic resonance,
mammography, radiography, or computed tomography. The device
characterizes lesions based on features or information extracted from
the images and provides information about the lesion(s) to the user.
Diagnostic and patient management decisions are made by the clinical
user.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ FDA notes that the ``ACTION'' caption for this final order
is styled as ``Final amendment; final order,'' rather than ``Final
order.'' Beginning in December 2019, this editorial change was made
to indicate that the document ``amends'' the Code of Federal
Regulations. The change was made in accordance with the Office of
Federal Register's (OFR) interpretations of the Federal Register Act
(44 U.S.C. chapter 15), its implementing regulations (1 CFR 5.9 and
parts 21 and 22), and the Document Drafting Handbook.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FDA has identified the following risks to health associated
specifically with this type of device and the measures required to
mitigate these risks in table 1.
Table 1--Radiological CADx Software for Lesions Suspicious for Cancer
Risks and Mitigation Measures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Identified risk Mitigation measures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Incorrect lesion(s) characterization Certain design verification and
leading to false positive results may validation activities
result in incorrect patient management identified in special control
with possible adverse effects such as (1) and Certain labeling
unnecessary treatment, unnecessary information identified in
additional medical imaging and/or special control (2).
unnecessary additional diagnostic
workup such as biopsy.
Incorrect lesion(s) characterization Certain design verification and
leading to false negative results may validation activities
lead to complications, including identified in special control
incorrect diagnosis and delay in (1) and Certain labeling
disease management. information identified in
special control (2).
The device could be misused to analyze Certain design verification and
images from an unintended patient validation activities
population or on images acquired with identified in special control
incompatible imaging hardware or (1) and Certain labeling
incompatible image acquisition information identified in
parameters, leading to inappropriate special control (2).
diagnostic information being displayed
to the user.
[[Page 3542]]
Device failure could lead to the Certain design verification and
absence of results, delay of results validation activities
or incorrect results, which could identified in special control
likewise lead to inaccurate patient (1) and Certain labeling
assessment. information identified in
special control (2).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FDA has determined that special controls, in combination with the
general controls, address these risks to health and provide reasonable
assurance of safety and effectiveness. In order for a device to fall
within this classification, and thus avoid automatic classification in
class III, it would have to comply with the special controls named in
this final order. The necessary special controls appear in the
regulation codified by this order. This device is subject to premarket
notification requirements under section 510(k) of the FD&C Act.
At the time of classification, radiological CADx software for
lesions suspicious for cancer are for prescription use only.
Prescription devices are exempt from the requirement for adequate
directions for use for the layperson under section 502(f)(1) of the
FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 352(f)(1)) and 21 CFR 801.5, as long as the
conditions of 21 CFR 801.109 are met.
III. Analysis of Environmental Impact
The Agency has determined under 21 CFR 25.34(b) that this action is
of a type that does not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. Therefore, neither an environmental
assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required.
IV. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This final order establishes special controls that refer to
previously approved collections of information found in other FDA
regulations and guidance. These collections of information are subject
to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521). The collections
of information in the guidance document ``De Novo Classification
Process (Evaluation of Automatic Class III Designation)'' have been
approved under OMB control number 0910-0844; the collections of
information in part 814, subparts A through E, regarding premarket
approval, have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0231; the
collections of information in part 807, subpart E, regarding premarket
notification submissions, have been approved under OMB control number
0910-0120; the collections of information in part 820, regarding the
quality system regulation, have been approved under OMB control number
0910-0073; and the collections of information in parts 801 and 809,
regarding labeling, have been approved under OMB control number 0910-
0485.
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 892
Medical devices, Radiation protection, X-rays.
Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR part
892 is amended as follows:
PART 892--RADIOLOGY DEVICES
0
1. The authority citation for part 892 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 351, 360, 360c, 360e, 360j, 360l, 371.
0
2. Add Sec. 892.2060 to subpart B to read as follows:
Sec. 892.2060 Radiological computer-assisted diagnostic software for
lesions suspicious of cancer.
(a) Identification. A radiological computer-assisted diagnostic
software for lesions suspicious of cancer is an image processing
prescription device intended to aid in the characterization of lesions
as suspicious for cancer identified on acquired medical images such as
magnetic resonance, mammography, radiography, or computed tomography.
The device characterizes lesions based on features or information
extracted from the images and provides information about the lesion(s)
to the user. Diagnostic and patient management decisions are made by
the clinical user.
(b) Classification. Class II (special controls). The special
controls for this device are:
(1) Design verification and validation must include:
(i) A detailed description of the image analysis algorithms
including, but not limited to, a detailed description of the algorithm
inputs and outputs, each major component or block, and algorithm
limitations.
(ii) A detailed description of pre-specified performance testing
protocols and dataset(s) used to assess whether the device will improve
reader performance as intended.
(iii) Results from performance testing protocols that demonstrate
that the device improves reader performance in the intended use
population when used in accordance with the instructions for use. The
performance assessment must be based on appropriate diagnostic accuracy
measures (e.g., receiver operator characteristic plot, sensitivity,
specificity, predictive value, and diagnostic likelihood ratio). The
test dataset must contain sufficient numbers of cases from important
cohorts (e.g., subsets defined by clinically relevant confounders,
effect modifiers, concomitant diseases, and subsets defined by image
acquisition characteristics) such that the performance estimates and
confidence intervals of the device for these individual subsets can be
characterized for the intended use population and imaging equipment.
(iv) Standalone performance testing protocols and results of the
device.
(v) Appropriate software documentation (e.g., device hazard
analysis; software requirements specification document; software design
specification document; traceability analysis; and description of
verification and validation activities including system level test
protocol, pass/fail criteria, results, and cybersecurity).
(2) Labeling must include:
(i) A detailed description of the patient population for which the
device is indicated for use.
(ii) A detailed description of the intended reading protocol.
(iii) A detailed description of the intended user and recommended
user training.
(iv) A detailed description of the device inputs and outputs.
(v) A detailed description of compatible imaging hardware and
imaging protocols.
(vi) Warnings, precautions, and limitations, including situations
in which the device may fail or may not operate at its expected
performance level (e.g., poor image quality or for certain
subpopulations), as applicable.
[[Page 3543]]
(vii) Detailed instructions for use.
(viii) A detailed summary of the performance testing, including:
Test methods, dataset characteristics, results, and a summary of sub-
analyses on case distributions stratified by relevant confounders
(e.g., lesion and organ characteristics, disease stages, and imaging
equipment).
Dated: January 9, 2020.
Lowell J. Schiller,
Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2020-00497 Filed 1-21-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P