» Articles » PMID: 34448829

Improved Clinical Investigation and Evaluation of High-risk Medical Devices: the Rationale and Objectives of CORE-MD (Coordinating Research and Evidence for Medical Devices)

Overview
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

In the European Union (EU) the delivery of health services is a national responsibility but there are concerted actions between member states to protect public health. Approval of pharmaceutical products is the responsibility of the European Medicines Agency, whereas authorizing the placing on the market of medical devices is decentralized to independent 'conformity assessment' organizations called notified bodies. The first legal basis for an EU system of evaluating medical devices and approving their market access was the medical device directives, from the 1990s. Uncertainties about clinical evidence requirements, among other reasons, led to the EU Medical Device Regulation (2017/745) that has applied since May 2021. It provides general principles for clinical investigations but few methodological details-which challenges responsible authorities to set appropriate balances between regulation and innovation, pre- and post-market studies, and clinical trials and real-world evidence. Scientific experts should advise on methods and standards for assessing and approving new high-risk devices, and safety, efficacy, and transparency of evidence should be paramount. The European Commission recently awarded a Horizon 2020 grant to a consortium led by the European Society of Cardiology and the European Federation of National Associations of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, that will review methodologies of clinical investigations, advise on study designs, and develop recommendations for aggregating clinical data from registries and other real-world sources. The CORE-MD project (Coordinating Research and Evidence for Medical Devices) will run until March 2024; here we describe how it may contribute to the development of regulatory science in Europe.

Citing Articles

Survey of Notified Bodies reveals very limited use of conditional certification for high-risk medical devices.

Dobrzynska A, Rejon-Parrilla J, Epstein D, Aranda-Lopez J, Fraser A, Blasco-Amaro J Front Med Technol. 2025; 7:1504294.

PMID: 39963190 PMC: 11830701. DOI: 10.3389/fmedt.2025.1504294.


CORE-MD clinical risk score for regulatory evaluation of artificial intelligence-based medical device software.

Rademakers F, Biasin E, Bruining N, Caiani E, Davies R, Gilbert S NPJ Digit Med. 2025; 8(1):90.

PMID: 39915308 PMC: 11802784. DOI: 10.1038/s41746-025-01459-8.


Large simple randomized controlled trials-from drugs to medical devices: lessons from recent experience.

Buccheri S, James S, Mafham M, Landray M, Melvin T, Oldgren J Trials. 2025; 26(1):24.

PMID: 39833917 PMC: 11749104. DOI: 10.1186/s13063-025-08724-x.


Developing technologies to assess vascular ageing: a roadmap from VascAgeNet.

Zanelli S, Agnoletti D, Alastruey J, Allen J, Bianchini E, Bikia V Physiol Meas. 2024; 45(12).

PMID: 38838703 PMC: 11697036. DOI: 10.1088/1361-6579/ad548e.


Validating Orthopaedic Data Evaluation Panel (ODEP) Ratings Across 9 Orthopaedic Registries: Total Hip Implants with an ODEP Rating Perform Better Than Those without an ODEP Rating.

Hoogervorst L, van Tilburg M, Lubbeke A, Wilton T, Nelissen R, Marang-van de Mheen P J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2024; 106(17):1583-1593.

PMID: 38820172 PMC: 11593974. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.23.00793.


References
1.
Ragnarsson S, Janiec M, Modrau I, Dreifaldt M, Ericsson A, Holmgren A . No-touch saphenous vein grafts in coronary artery surgery (SWEDEGRAFT): Rationale and design of a multicenter, prospective, registry-based randomized clinical trial. Am Heart J. 2020; 224:17-24. DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2020.03.009. View

2.
Ioannidis J, Adami H . Nested randomized trials in large cohorts and biobanks: studying the health effects of lifestyle factors. Epidemiology. 2007; 19(1):75-82. DOI: 10.1097/EDE.0b013e31815be01c. View

3.
Almond C, Chen E, Berman M, Less J, Baldwin J, Linde-Feucht S . High-risk medical devices, children and the FDA: regulatory challenges facing pediatric mechanical circulatory support devices. ASAIO J. 2007; 53(1):4-7. DOI: 10.1097/01.mat.0000247958.84788.3a. View

4.
Erdos J, Ettinger S, Mayer-Ferbas J, de Villiers C, Wild C . European Collaboration in Health Technology Assessment (HTA): goals, methods and outcomes with specific focus on medical devices. Wien Med Wochenschr. 2019; 169(11-12):284-292. PMC: 6713669. DOI: 10.1007/s10354-019-0684-0. View

5.
Fraser A, Butchart E, Szymanski P, Caiani E, Crosby S, Kearney P . The need for transparency of clinical evidence for medical devices in Europe. Lancet. 2018; 392(10146):521-530. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31270-4. View