Comparison of supportive regulatory measures for pediatric medical device development in Japan and the United States.

Further development of medical devices for children is required in Japan, but the development of such devices is delayed compared to that of medical devices for adults. Herein, we investigated policies for advancing the development of pediatric medical devices in Japan and the United States. Considering the achievements of each policy, we proposed a strategy to promote further development of pediatric medical devices in Japan. We investigated policies for supporting the development of pediatric medical devices and approved cases in Japan and the United States by searching contents of websites of regulatory bodies and other related administrations, and scientific papers. We found the main six policies in Japan and nine main policies in the United States for the development of pediatric medical devices. In the United States, various measures have initiated mainly in the 2000s, while in Japan, the main measures have been in place since 2013. Similarities were found in both countries, such as subsidies for application fees and research and development expenses, exemption of requirements for regulatory approval, and priority review and consultation by the regulatory body. Our study revealed that there are similarities in initiatives by both countries. To promote further development of pediatric medical devices in the future, improvements to expediting the review process to approval by the regulatory body, global development, and implementation of alternative measures to ensure the efficacy and safety of the device instead of large-scale clinical trials should be anticipated through cooperation among industry, government, and academia.

Partnership Between Japan and the United States for Early Development of Pediatric Medical Devices　- Harmonization By Doing for Children.

BACKGROUND: The Harmonization By Doing (HBD) program was established in 2003 as a partnership among stakeholders of academia, industry and regulatory agencies in Japan and the United States, with a primary focus on streamlining processes of global medical device development for cardiovascular medical devices. While HBD has traditionally focused on development of devices intended to treat conditions prevalent in adults, in 2016, HBD established the "HBD-for-Children" program, which focuses on the development of pediatric devices as the development of medical devices for pediatric use lags behind that of medical devices for adults in both countries.Methods and Results:Activities of the program have included: (1) conducting a survey with industry to better understand the challenges that constrain the development of pediatric medical devices; (2) categorizing pediatric medical devices into five categories based on global availability and exploring concrete solutions for the early application and regulatory approval in both geographies; and (3) facilitating global clinical trials of pediatric medical devices in both countries. CONCLUSIONS: The establishment of the HBD-for-Children program is significant because it represents a global initiative for the introduction of pediatric medical devices for patients in a timely manner. Through the program, academia, industry and regulatory agencies can work together to facilitate innovative pediatric device development from a multi-stakeholder perspective. This activity could also encourage industry partners to pursue the development of pediatric medical devices.

PMDedu: Assessing the educational needs of startups and academic investigators focused on pediatric medical device development.

Background: The pediatric medical device development (PMDD) process is highly complex, beset by a variety of financial, technical, medical, and regulatory barriers. Startup company innovators and academic investigators often struggle with accessing specialized knowledge relating to regulatory requirements, product development, research, and marketing strategies. Objectives: The West Coast Consortium for Technology & Innovation in Pediatrics (CTIP) conducted an educational needs assessment to understand knowledge gaps and inform our educational strategy. Methods: We surveyed a total of 49 medical device startups and 52 academic investigators. Electronic surveys were developed for each group on Qualtrics and focused on manufacturing, regulatory, research, commercialization, and funding. Descriptive statistics were used. Results: A larger proportion of academic investigator respondents had a clinical background compared to the startup respondents (45% vs. 22%). The biggest barriers for academic investigators were understanding regulatory and safety requirements testing (52%) and finding and obtaining non-dilutive funding was the most difficult (54%). Among startups, understanding clinical research methods and requirements was the biggest barrier (79%). Conclusion: Startup companies and academic investigators have similar, but not identical, educational needs to better understand the PMD development process. Investigators need more support in identifying funding sources, while startup companies identified an increased need for education on research regulatory topics. These findings can help guide curriculum development as well as opportunities for partnerships between academia and startups.

FDA's pediatric device consortia: national program fosters pediatric medical device development.

OBJECTIVES: This article reports on the progress made in addressing pediatric medical device needs through the establishment of the Pediatric Device Consortia Grant Program. Pediatric practitioners should be aware of both the imperative for well-studied devices for children and the existence of recently created resources to help foster the development of such products. METHODS: This article discusses some of the challenges associated with pediatric device development and describes the implementation of section 305 of the Pediatric Medical Device Safety and Improvement Act of 2007. This statute called for the creation of nonprofit consortia to facilitate the development, production, and distribution of pediatric medical devices. RESULTS: A summary of the accomplishments of the pediatric device consortia is presented. Eleven million dollars have been awarded to 5 consortia since 2009. As of July 2012, they have collectively assisted in the development of 219 pediatric device ideas. The consortia provide innovators with both mentorship and services to help advance proposed pediatric device projects, including assistance with prototyping, identification of potential funding sources, preclinical and clinical trial design, and introductions to potential manufacturers. CONCLUSIONS: Currently, 5 federally funded pediatric device consortia exist to help advance the development of potential pediatric devices. These consortia serve as a national resource for those with ideas for medical devices that may advance the health and well-being of children.