As artificial intelligence continues to revolutionize medical device development, the FDA’s evolving regulatory framework presents both opportunities and challenges for manufacturers. The recently released guidance on AI/ML-enabled medical devices introduces crucial requirements that impact development strategies, validation processes, and market entry timelines. At Veranex, our regulatory and AI development teams are prepared to help clients navigate these new requirements while maintaining momentum. This FAQ addresses the most common questions we receive from medical device manufacturers about AI implementation, from Predetermined Change Control Plan (PCCP) requirements to transparency principles that ensure both regulatory compliance and patient safety. Read part one of this series here, and part two here.
Here’s a breakdown of what determines whether a Predetermined Change Control Plan (PCCP) for a Medical Device is relevant and when a manufacturer might choose to include one:
In summary, a PCCP is not a regulatory requirement for all medical products. It’s a tool available to manufacturers of AI-DSFs that allows them to proactively plan for and obtain pre-authorization for specific future modifications, streamlining the process and potentially reducing the burden of multiple submissions. The decision to include a PCCP is driven by the nature of the AI-DSF and the manufacturer’s strategy for its ongoing development and improvement.
These principles are designed to ensure the safety, effectiveness, and high quality of AI/ML-powered medical devices. Keep these in mind throughout the entire product lifecycle:
This summary should help you quickly grasp the key principles of GMLP for medical devices. Remember to refer to the full document for more detailed information. Credit: https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/software-medical-device-samd/good-machine-learning-practice-medical-device-development-guiding-principles
This is a summary of “Transparency for Machine Learning-Enabled Medical Devices: Guiding Principles“, developed by the FDA, Health Canada, and the United Kingdom’s Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), that outlines guiding principles for transparency in machine learning-enabled medical devices (MLMDs). It builds upon the previously established Good Machine Learning Practice (GMLP) principles, particularly focusing on the performance of the human-AI team and the provision of clear user information.
The guiding principles are structured around six key questions:
Transparency is crucial for patient-centered care, safe and effective device use, risk management, and promoting health equity. Relevant information includes device characterization, workflow integration, performance, benefits, risks, development, and limitations. Information should be accessible through the user interface, personalized, and delivered at appropriate times.
The following table was extracted from Transparency for Machine Learning-Enabled Medical Devices: Guiding Principles“”, “Table 1: Summary of transparency guiding principles”:
Who: Relevant audiences for transparency |
Transparency is relevant to all parties involved in a patient’s health care, including those intended to:
|
Why: Motivation for transparency |
Transparency supports:
|
What: Relevant information |
Enabling an understanding of the MLMD includes sharing relevant information on:
|
Where: Placement of information |
Maximizing the utility of the software user interface can:
|
When: Timing of communication |
Timely communication can support successful transparency, such as:
|
How: Methods to support transparency |
Human-centred design principles can support transparency. |
Source of above: Transparency for Machine Learning-Enabled Medical Devices: Guiding Principles – June 2024
Regarding Transparency, Appendix B from “Artificial Intelligence-Enabled Device Software Functions: Lifecycle Management and Marketing Submission Recommendations” provides recommendations for designing transparent AI-enabled medical devices, emphasizing a user-centered approach throughout the Total Product Life Cycle (TPLC).
Transparency should be integrated from the initial design phase, rather than as an afterthought, to ensure that relevant performance and design information is clearly communicated to stakeholders in an understandable and actionable way. This involves making information accessible, functionally comprehensible, and connected to the device’s usability.
The design process should begin with a comprehensive understanding of the device’s context of use, including how various factors impact performance. Transparency should be considered across the entire lifecycle, from implementation to decommissioning.
The user interface is a critical area for applying transparency principles, complementing printed labeling with timely and contextually relevant information. This includes alerts, hardware components, and display screens. The design process should identify user tasks, associated risks, and how and when information is needed, integrating risk controls and validating that users can understand the information.
The document emphasizes that transparency is context-dependent, varying based on the device’s risk profile and user needs. It stresses the importance of providing the right information at the right time, focusing on user tasks and the information needed to perform them safely and effectively. This includes considering who needs the information, when they need it, and the context of use.
The user interface should be designed to communicate information effectively through various elements, such as packaging, labeling, training, controls, displays, outputs, alarms, and the logic of operation. Understanding user characteristics, needs, and limitations is crucial, including their functional capabilities, experience, training, and how new information compares to past experiences.
The communication style and format should be clear and appropriate for each user and task, considering factors like reading level, information location, and design elements. Finally, while explainability tools and visualizations can enhance transparency, they must be well-designed and validated to avoid misleading users.
Source: Artificial Intelligence-Enabled Device Software Functions: Lifecycle Management and Marketing Submission Recommendations – Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff (Appendix B)
Understanding and implementing the FDA’s AI/ML guidance requires a sophisticated blend of regulatory expertise, technical knowledge, and strategic planning. The answers provided here offer a foundation for navigating these complex requirements, but successful implementation demands a partner with deep experience in both AI development and medical device regulations.
Veranex’s integrated approach combines regulatory strategy, AI development expertise, and clinical validation capabilities to help manufacturers navigate these evolving requirements efficiently. Our team’s expertise in implementing Good Machine Learning Practices (GMLP) and managing AI lifecycles ensures that innovative medical devices not only meet regulatory requirements but also deliver meaningful clinical benefits to patients. For more detailed guidance on your specific AI-enabled medical device development journey, contact our team.