A hazard evaluation of the reproductive/developmental toxicity of cobalt in medical devices.

Cobalt (Co) is an essential element with human exposure occurring from the diet, supplement ingestion, occupational sources, and medical devices. The European Chemical Agency (ECHA) recently voted to classify Co metal as a Reproductive Hazard Category 1B; presumed human reproductive toxicant due to adverse testicular effects in male rodents. A weight of evidence evaluation of the preclinical reproductive and developmental toxicity studies and available clinical data was performed to critically evaluate the relevance of this proposed classification for Co in medical devices. Reproductive responses to Co are limited to the male testes and sperm function following high systemic exposure in rodents, only at Co concentrations/doses that result in overt toxicity (i.e., above the maximum tolerable dose (MTD)). The potential mechanisms of Co reproductive/developmental toxicity, including its indirect mode of action in the testes and relevance to humans, are discussed. The available preclinical and clincial evidence suggests that it would be more appropriate to classify Co as a Reproductive Hazard Category 2 compound: suspected human reproductive toxicant and, in the case of Co-containing medical devices, it should not be considered a reproductive hazard.

An integrated benefit-risk assessment of cobalt-containing alloys used in medical devices: Implications for regulatory requirements in the European Union.

In 2017, the European Union (EU) Committee for Risk Assessment (RAC) recommended the classification of metallic cobalt (Co) as Category 1B with respect to its carcinogenic and reproductive hazard potential and Category 2 for mutagenicity but did not evaluate the relevance of these classifications for patients exposed to Co-containing alloys (CoCA) used in medical devices. CoCA are inherently different materials from Co metal from a toxicological perspective and thus require a separate assessment. CoCA are biocompatible materials with a unique combination of properties including strength, durability, and a long history of safe use that make them uniquely suited for use in a wide-range of medical devices. Assessments were performed on relevant preclinical and clinical carcinogenicity and reproductive toxicity data for Co and CoCA to meet the requirements under the EU Medical Device Regulation triggered by the ECHA re-classification (adopted in October 2019 under the 14th Adaptation to Technical Progress to CLP) and to address their relevance to patient safety. The objective of this review is to present an integrated overview of these assessments, a benefit-risk assessment and an examination of potential alternative materials. The data support the conclusion that the exposure to CoCA in medical devices via clinically relevant routes does not represent a hazard for carcinogenicity or reproductive toxicity. Additionally, the risk for the adverse effects that are known to occur with elevated Co concentrations (e.g., cardiomyopathy) are very low for CoCA implant devices (infrequent reports often reflecting a unique catastrophic failure event out of millions of patients) and negligible for CoCA non-implant devices (not measurable/no case reports). In conclusion, the favorable benefit-risk profile also in relation to possible alternatives presented herein strongly support continued use of CoCA in medical devices.

Carcinogenic hazard assessment of cobalt-containing alloys in medical devices: Review of in vivo studies.

Cobalt (Co) alloys have been used for over seven decades in a wide range of medical devices, including, but not limited to, hip and knee implants, surgical tools, and vascular stents, due to their favorable biocompatibility, durability, and mechanical properties. A recent regulatory hazard classification review by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) resulted in the classification of metallic Co as a Class 1B Carcinogen (presumed to have carcinogenic potential for humans), primarily based on inhalation rodent carcinogenicity studies with pure metallic Co. The ECHA review did not specifically consider the carcinogenicity hazard potential of forms or routes of Co that are relevant for medical devices. The purpose of this review is to present a comprehensive assessment of the available in vivo preclinical data on the carcinogenic hazard potential of exposure to Co-containing alloys (CoCA) in medical devices by relevant routes. In vivo data were reviewed from 33 preclinical studies that examined the impact of Co exposure on local and systemic tumor incidence in rats, mice, guinea pigs, and hamsters. Across these studies, there was no significant increase of local or systemic tumors in studies relevant for medical devices. Taken together, the relevant in vivo data led to the conclusion that CoCA in medical devices are not a carcinogenic hazard in available in vivo models. While specific patient and implant factors cannot be fully replicated using in vivo models, the available in vivo preclinical data support that CoCA in medical devices are unlikely a carcinogenic hazard to patients.

An Amperometric Glucose Sensor Integrated into an Insulin Delivery Cannula: In Vitro and In Vivo Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Labeling prohibits delivery of insulin at the site of subcutaneous continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). Integration of the sensing and insulin delivery functions into a single device would likely increase the usage of CGM in persons with type 1 diabetes. METHODS: To understand the nature of such interference, we measured glucose at the site of bolus insulin delivery in swine using a flexible electrode strip that was laminated to the outer wall of an insulin delivery cannula. In terms of sensing design, we compared H2O2-measuring sensors biased at 600 mV with redox mediator-type sensors biased at 175 mV. RESULTS: In H2O2-measuring sensors, but not in sensors with redox-mediated chemistry, a spurious rise in current was seen after insulin lis-pro boluses. This prolonged artifact was accompanied by electrode poisoning. In redox-mediated sensors, the patterns of sensor signals acquired during delivery of saline and without any liquid delivery were similar to those acquired during insulin delivery. CONCLUSION: Considering in vitro and in vivo findings together, it became clear that the mechanism of interference is the oxidation, at high bias potentials, of phenolic preservatives present in insulin formulations. This effect can be avoided by the use of redox mediator chemistry using a low bias potential.