Top

Trials

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2017 | Research

Pivotal trials of orthopedic surgical devices in the United States: predominance of two-arm non-inferiority designs

Author: S. Raymond Golish

Published in: Trials | Issue 1/2017

Abstract

Background

The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reviews class III orthopedic devices submitted for premarket approval with pivotal clinical trials. The purpose of this study was to determine the types of orthopedic devices reviewed, the design of their pivotal clinical trials, and the subjective factors affecting the interpretation of clinical trial data.

Methods

Meetings of the FDA Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel were identified from 2000–2016. Meeting materials were collected from FDA electronic archives and notes were made regarding the device-type and subsequent approval and recall, the design of pivotal clinical trials, and issues of trial interpretation debated during panel deliberations.

Results

The panel was convened on 29 separate occasions over the course of 35 days to deliberate 38 distinct topics. Of these, 23 topics included clinical data submitted for approval of a device, and two topics were excluded. Of the 23 devices, five were biologic, three were hip arthroplasty, three were disc arthroplasty, two were viscosupplementation, three were interspinous process devices, and seven were other devices. Of the 23 pivotal trials, 20 (87.0%) were randomized controlled trials (RCTs), consisting of 13 (65.0%) non-inferiority trials and 7 (35.0%) superiority trials, and all RCTs were two-arm trials. At panel, the most commonly debated issues were related to the design and interpretation of non-inferiority trials.

Conclusions

A broad array of device types is reviewed by the FDA. The predominance of two-arm non-inferiority trials as pivotal studies indicates that the nuances of their design and interpretation are commercially important.

Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Overview of device regulation. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/Overview/default.htm. Accessed 27 June 2015.

FDA determines knee device should not have been cleared for marketing. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm229384.htm. Accessed: 29 June 2015.

Mundy A. Political lobbying drove FDA process. Wall Street J. 2009.

Summary minutes of the orthopedic and rehabilitation devices panel. Medical devices advisory committee. Open session. 2000. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/00/minutes/3633m1.htm. Accessed 3 May 2015.

Osteonics ABC and Trident approval letter.

FDA Executive Summary. BioMimetic’s augment bone graft. Orthopedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel; 2011.

Food and Drug Administration. Executive Summary for P050036 Medtronic’s AMPLIFY^TM rhBMP-2 Matrix, Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Devices Advisory Panel. 2010.

Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel Meeting; 2009.

Premarket approval (PMA). Available at: http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfPMA/pma.cfm. Accessed 29 June 2015.

10.

Medtronic, Inc. Form 10-Q. United States SEC. 2011. Available at: http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/64670/000089710111000375/medtronic111166_10q.htm. Accessed 29 June 2015.

11.

Freedom of Information—FOI information. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/RegulatoryInformation/FOI/ucm390370.htm. Accessed 5 July 2015.

12.

Wellek S. Testing statistical hypotheses of equivalence and noninferiority, second edition. Chapman and Hall/CRC; 2010.

13.

International Conference on Harmonization of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use: Choice of control group and related issues in clinical trials (E10).

14.

International Conference on Harmonization of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use: Statistical principles for clinical trials (E9).

15.

US FDA Draft Guidance for Industry: Non-inferiority clinical trials; 2010.

16.

FDA Executive Summary. VertiFlex® Superion® Inter Spinous Spacer. Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel of the Medical Devices Advisory Committee; 2015.

17.

Snapinn SM. Noninferiority trials. Curr Control Trials Cardiovasc Med. 2000;1:19–21.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Committee for Proprietary Medicinal Products. Points to consider on switching between superiority and non-inferiority. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2001;52:223–8.CrossRef

19.

United States Food and Drug Administration. Orthopedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel, Official Transcript. 2011.

20.

Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel—2016 Meeting Materials of the Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/MedicalDevices/MedicalDevicesAdvisoryCommittee/OrthopaedicandRehabilitationDevicesPanel/ucm486365.htm. Accessed 4 July 2016.

21.

Hernán MA, Hernández-Díaz S. Beyond the intention-to-treat in comparative effectiveness research. Clin Trials Lond Engl. 2012;9:48–55.CrossRef

22.

Porta N, Bonet C, Cobo E. Discordance between reported intention-to-treat and per protocol analyses. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60:663–9.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Matilde Sanchez M, Chen X. Choosing the analysis population in non-inferiority studies: per protocol or intent-to-treat. Stat Med. 2006;25:1169–81.CrossRefPubMed

24.

Brittain E, Lin D. A comparison of intent-to-treat and per-protocol results in antibiotic non-inferiority trials. Stat Med. 2005;24:1–10.CrossRefPubMed

25.

McNamee R. Intention to treat, per protocol, as treated and instrumental variable estimators given non-compliance and effect heterogeneity. Stat Med. 2009;28:2639–52.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Food and Drug Administration. Center for Devices and Radiologic Health. Medical Devices Advisory Committee. Orthopedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel. Official Transcript; 2010

27.

Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel—Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel meeting brief summary for December 11, 2003. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/MedicalDevices/MedicalDevicesAdvisoryCommittee/OrthopaedicandRehabilitationDevicesPanel/ucm124881.htm. Accessed 5 July 2015.

28.

In-depth statistical review for expedited pma (P040006) Charité Artificial Disc, DePuySpine, Inc. 2004. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/04/briefing/4049b1_04_Statistical%20Review%20Memo%20JCC.htm. Accessed 3 May 2015.

29.

Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel—September 19, 2006. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/MedicalDevices/MedicalDevicesAdvisoryCommittee/OrthopaedicandRehabilitationDevicesPanel/ucm125153.htm. Accessed 3 May 2015.

30.

Summary of Safety and Effectiveness. X STOP Interspinous Process Decompression System; 2004.

31.

FDA Executive Summary. Metal-on-metal hip implant systems. Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Devices Advisory Panel; 2012.

32.

Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Metal-on-metal hip implants—recalls. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/ProductsandMedicalProcedures/ImplantsandProsthetics/MetalonMetalHipImplants/ucm241770.htm. Accessed 16 Aug 2015.

33.

Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Premarket approval P040033 S006. Available at: http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfpma/pma.cfm?id=4276. Accessed 16 Aug 2015.

34.

Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Premarket approval P040033 S011. Available at: http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfpma/pma.cfm?id=17172. Accessed 16 Aug 2015.

35.

Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Premarket approval P030022. Available at: http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfpma/pma.cfm?id=1280. Accessed 16 Aug 2015.

36.

FDA. Class 2 device recall Trident. Available at: http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfRES/res.cfm?id=82672. Accessed 27 Sep 2015.

37.

Wright Medical Group, Inc. announces receipt of FDA approvable letter for Augment® bone graft | Business Wire. 2014. Available at: http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20141027006382/en/Wright-Medical-Group-Announces-Receipt-FDA-Approvable#.VZHL0UZ0e1k. Accessed 29 June 2015.

38.

Center for Devices and Radiological Health. DIAM spinal stabilization system. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/MedicalDevices/MedicalDevicesAdvisoryCommittee/OrthopaedicandRehabilitationDevicesPanel/UCM486370.pdf. Accessed 4 July 2016.

39.

FDA Executive Summary. Orthopedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel. Classification of iontophoresis devices not labeled for use with a specific drug; 2014.

40.

FDA Executive Summary. Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel. Classification of spinal sphere devices; 2013.

41.

FDA Executive Summary. Orthopedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel. Reclassification of stair-climbing wheelchair devices; 2013.

42.

FDA Executive Summary. Orthopedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel. Reclassification of mechanical wheelchair devices; 2013.

43.

FDA Executive Summary. Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel of the Medical Devices Advisory Committee. Classification discussion pedicle screw spinal systems (certain uses—Class III indications for use); 2013.

44.

FDA Executive Summary. Orthopedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel. Classification discussion for nonthermal shortwave diathermy; 2013.

45.

FDA Executive Summary. Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel. Petition to request classification for posterior cervical pedicle and lateral mass screw spinal systems; 2012.

46.

FDA Summary for Durolane. Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel; 2009.

47.

FDA Executive Summary for DePuy Orthopaedics CoMplete^TM acetabular hip system. Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel; 2009.

48.

Summary (March 31, 2009: Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel Meeting). Available at: http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/MedicalDevices/MedicalDevicesAdvisoryCommittee/OrthopaedicandRehabilitationDevicesPanel/ucm152604.htm. Accessed 3 May 2015.

49.

Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel Meeting—December 9, 2008. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/MedicalDevices/MedicalDevicesAdvisoryCommittee/OrthopaedicandRehabilitationDevicesPanel/ucm125430.htm. Accessed 3 May 2015.

50.

FDA PMA P070023 Executive Summary FzioMed, Inc. Oxiplex®/SP Gel July 15, 2008.

51.

Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel—July 17, 2007. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/MedicalDevices/MedicalDevicesAdvisoryCommittee/OrthopaedicandRehabilitationDevicesPanel/ucm125028.htm. Accessed: 3 May 2015.

52.

Summary of the Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel Meeting—April 24, 2007. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/MedicalDevices/MedicalDevicesAdvisoryCommittee/OrthopaedicandRehabilitationDevicesPanel/ucm124865.htm. Accessed 3 May 2015.

53.

Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel—February 22, 2007. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/MedicalDevices/MedicalDevicesAdvisoryCommittee/OrthopaedicandRehabilitationDevicesPanel/ucm125022.htm. Accessed 3 May 2015.

54.

Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel—June 2, 2006. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/MedicalDevices/MedicalDevicesAdvisoryCommittee/OrthopaedicandRehabilitationDevicesPanel/ucm125024.htm. Accessed 3 May 2015.

55.

Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel Meeting Brief Summary for June 2 and 3, 2004. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/MedicalDevices/MedicalDevicesAdvisoryCommittee/OrthopaedicandRehabilitationDevicesPanel/ucm124868.htm. Accessed 3 May 2015.

56.

Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel Meeting Brief Summary for December 11, 2003. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/MedicalDevices/MedicalDevicesAdvisoryCommittee/OrthopaedicandRehabilitationDevicesPanel/ucm124881.htm. Accessed 3 May 2015.

57.

Summary minutes. Meeting of the orthopaedics and rehabilitation devices. Advisory panel. Open session. November 21, 2002. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/02/minutes/3910m2.htm. Accessed 3 May 2015.

58.

US Food and Drug Administration. iBOT 3000 mobility system. Summary of statistical review findings. 2002.

59.

United States Of America. Food and Drug Administration. Orthopedics and rehabilitation devices advisory panel. Public meeting. Thursday, January 10, 2002. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/02/transcripts/3828t1.htm. Accessed 3 May 2015.

Title: Pivotal trials of orthopedic surgical devices in the United States: predominance of two-arm non-inferiority designs
Author: S. Raymond Golish
Publication date: 01-12-2017
Publisher: BioMed Central
Published in: Trials / Issue 1/2017
Electronic ISSN: 1745-6215
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-017-2032-2

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Pivotal trials of orthopedic surgical devices in the United States: predominance of two-arm non-inferiority designs

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

Accreditation in general practice in Denmark: study protocol for a cluster-randomized controlled trial

Targeting functional fitness, hearing and health-related quality of life in older adults with hearing loss: Walk, Talk 'n' Listen, study protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial

Marketing trials, marketing tricks — how to spot them and how to stop them

Does intensive management improve remission rates in patients with intermediate rheumatoid arthritis? (the TITRATE trial): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Correction to Crowdsourcing to promote HIV testing among MSM in China: study protocol for a stepped wedge randomized controlled trial

The impact of the time of drug administration on the effectiveness of combined treatment of hypercholesterolemia with Rosuvastatin and Ezetimibe (RosEze): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial