Medical Design and Outsourcing

  • Home
  • Medical Device Business
    • Mergers & Acquisitions
    • Financial
    • Regulatory
  • Applications
    • Cardiovascular
    • Devices
    • Imaging
    • Implantables
    • Medical Equipment
    • Orthopedic
    • Surgical
  • Technologies
    • Contract Manufacturing
    • Components
    • Electronics
    • Extrusions
    • Materials
    • Motion Control
    • Prototyping
    • Pumps
    • Tubing
  • Med Tech Resources
    • Subscribe to Print Magazine
    • DeviceTalks Tuesdays
    • Digital Editions
    • eBooks
    • Manufacturer Search
    • Medical Device Handbook
    • MedTech 100 Index
    • Podcasts
    • Print Subscription
    • The Big 100
    • Webinars / Digital Events
    • Whitepapers
    • Video
  • 2022 Leadership in MedTech
    • 2022 Leadership Voting!
    • 2021 Winners
    • 2020 Winners
  • Women in Medtech

Has the CE mark lost its appeal for novel medical device developers?

March 22, 2022 By Jim Hammerand

CE mark medtech medical devicesMedtech companies are increasingly looking to the FDA instead of Europe’s CE mark when launching novel products, according to a new report.

“Historically, the CE mark has been the preferred route for novel medical technology registration, since its processes were faster, cheaper and more predictable. The situation is now reversed,” wrote the authors of the study, published by Boston Consulting Group and the UCLA Biodesign innovation hub.

They surveyed and interviewed leaders and executives at 102 companies that have achieved registration or approval of a combined 105 novel technologies. A little more than half of the respondents said they are deprioritizing the CE mark relative to FDA approval.

Of the companies surveyed, 90 are headquartered in the U.S. and nine in the EU. One-fifth of the companies are publicly traded.

Industry executives described product registration and approval as “cumbersome and uncertain” under the EU’s new Medical Device Regulation (MDR) for patient and provider safety.

“Common complaints centered on the cost and time of re-registering current SKUs, as well as on expectations for clinical studies and language translation requirements,” the authors wrote. “Smaller companies expressed these sentiments most strongly, while some executives from multinational medtech companies were more circumspect, speculating that MDR may indeed elevate the average quality of products on the market in the EU by reducing the number of undercapitalized new entrants.”

FDA guidance for traditional medical device registration was described as highly or somewhat predictable by 62% of respondents, while only 22% said the same of the CE mark. On the same question concerning digital technology, 32% of respondents considered the FDA pathway predictable compared to 15% for the CE mark.

The report cited encouraging FDA launches such as Medical Device User Fee Amendments to clear backlogs, the Innovation Pathway and Expedited Access Pathway to accommodate novel trial designs, Breakthrough Device designation to encourage innovation, and the Digital Health Center of Excellence to offer guidance for digital offerings.

Brexit may also be partly to blame for the shift. The United Kingdom will accept CE marking through June 2023 as it transitions to its own regulations. “Creating a separate review process for one of the largest European markets lessens the overall value of the CE mark and will likely change the risk-reward equation over the next decade as medtech companies roll out their new offerings,” the study said. “For EU residents, the likely impact will be delayed access to new and improved medical technology.”

The FDA’s gains may not last for long, as the survey respondents noted that contract opportunities in the U.S. and abroad could eventually call for the same metrics as MDR, “giving EU-compliant products and companies a competitive edge once again,” the researchers said.

The report also compared average review time in the EU and the U.S. from the first communication through clearance, finding CE marking (before MDR) came faster than FDA 510(k) clearance.

The survey takers cautioned that their findings are based on the opinions and biases of voluntary participants whose positive or negative experiences with regulators may have influenced their decision to take part, among other study limitations.

“Despite these limitations, this is the first study in more than 10 years that attempts to provide an industry-wide perspective and benchmarks on the industry’s experience with regulatory and reimbursement programs, processes, and authorities in the US and the global regulatory theater,” the researchers said.

The report can be read in full here.

You may also like:

  • FDA logo
    What you need to know about the FDA’s Total Product…
  • FDA logo
    How much time and money does it take for FDA…

Related Articles Read More >

EtO sterilized device
FDA reports sterilization challenge progress as EPA takes aim at EtO emissions
A portrait of AdvaMed CEO and President Scott Whitaker
AdvaMed defends EtO facilities on EPA’s cancer risk list
A map showing cancer risk from an EtO plant decreasing with distance from the facility
EPA flags high-cancer-risk EtO sterilization facilities across the country
AdvaMed pushes CMS for proposed TCET pathway rule this year

DeviceTalks Weekly.

August 5, 2022
DTW Medtronic's Greg Smith lays out supply chain strategies
See More >

MDO Digital Edition

Digital Edition

Subscribe to Medical Design & Outsourcing. Bookmark, share and interact with the leading medical design engineering magazine today.

MEDTECH 100 INDEX

Medtech 100 logo
Market Summary > Current Price
The MedTech 100 is a financial index calculated using the BIG100 companies covered in Medical Design and Outsourcing.
DeviceTalks

DeviceTalks is a conversation among medical technology leaders. It's events, podcasts, webinars and one-on-one exchanges of ideas & insights.

DeviceTalks

New MedTech Resource

Medical Tubing

Enewsletter Subscriptions

Enewsletter Subscriptions

MassDevice

Mass Device

The Medical Device Business Journal. MassDevice is the leading medical device news business journal telling the stories of the devices that save lives.

Visit Website
MDO ad
Medical Design and Outsourcing
  • MassDevice
  • DeviceTalks
  • MedTech100 Index
  • Medical Tubing + Extrusion
  • Medical Design Sourcing
  • Drug Delivery Business News
  • Drug Discovery & Development
  • Pharmaceutical Processing World
  • R&D World
  • About Us/Contact
  • Advertise With Us
  • Subscribe to Print Magazine
  • Subscribe to E-newsletter
  • Attend our Monthly Webinars
  • Listen to our Weekly Podcasts
  • Join our DeviceTalks Tuesdays Discussion

Copyright © 2022 WTWH Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved. The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of WTWH Media LLC. Site Map | Privacy Policy | RSS

Search Medical Design & Outsourcing

  • Home
  • Medical Device Business
    • Mergers & Acquisitions
    • Financial
    • Regulatory
  • Applications
    • Cardiovascular
    • Devices
    • Imaging
    • Implantables
    • Medical Equipment
    • Orthopedic
    • Surgical
  • Technologies
    • Contract Manufacturing
    • Components
    • Electronics
    • Extrusions
    • Materials
    • Motion Control
    • Prototyping
    • Pumps
    • Tubing
  • Med Tech Resources
    • Subscribe to Print Magazine
    • DeviceTalks Tuesdays
    • Digital Editions
    • eBooks
    • Manufacturer Search
    • Medical Device Handbook
    • MedTech 100 Index
    • Podcasts
    • Print Subscription
    • The Big 100
    • Webinars / Digital Events
    • Whitepapers
    • Video
  • 2022 Leadership in MedTech
    • 2022 Leadership Voting!
    • 2021 Winners
    • 2020 Winners
  • Women in Medtech