July 14, 2020

Volume X, Number 196

July 14, 2020

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

July 13, 2020

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

FDA Guidance Clarifies HDE Program Review

Earlier this month, the FDA released programmatic guidance intended to clarify the current review practices for the Humanitarian Device Exemption (“HDE”) Program (“Guidance”) reflecting recent changes in the HDE Program resulting from statutory amendments made by the 21st Century Cures. The Guidance addresses frequently asked questions about FDA actions on HDE applications, post-approval requirements, and includes a filing checklist to clarify the required information for the FDA to consider whether an HDE application is ready for substantive review.

Unlike premarket applications (“PMAs”) or De Novo Submissions, an HDE application is not required to include data that demonstrate the subject device has a reasonable assurance of effectiveness – instead the review standard requires the applicant show a probable benefit that exceeds the risk of using the device. An applicant must also demonstrate (among other things) that no similar device exists and that there is no other way to bring the device to market, and that the device would be used diagnose or treat rare diseases or conditions affecting less than 8,000 individuals in the United States per year (up from the longstanding limit of 4,000 that existed prior to passage of 21st Century Cures at the end of 2016).

The Guidance has not changed much since the June 2018 draft guidance. However, there are a few additional clarifications. For instance, the Guidance acknowledges “that investigations using laboratory animals or human subjects, as well as nonclinical investigations and analytical studies for in vitro diagnostics,” not just human subject testing may be used as evidence to support approval of an HDE application. The FDA also clarified the conditions under which an HDE can be suspended or withdrawn.

Overall, the FDA Guidance may be helpful in preparing HDE submissions, and may acknowledge additional flexibility with respect to HDE data requirements.  However, the fundamental limitations with the HDE pathway, such as limitation to very small populations and extensive post-approval requirements, remain unchanged.

©2020 Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. All rights reserved.National Law Review, Volume IX, Number 268


About this Author

Elizabeth Scarola Health Care Attorney

ELIZABETH SCAROLA is an Associate in the Health Care and Life Sciences practice, in the St. Petersburg office of Epstein Becker Green. She brings an insider’s perspective to her health care practice. In addition to her work on strategic, operational, and legal projects for a large, statewide clinically integrated network of hospitals and providers, she has hands-on scientific research experience. Ms. Scarola has conducted independent research in pediatric endocrinology and contributed to such publications as the Journal of the American Medical Association and ...