LinkedInXFacebook
Subscribe
Orthopedics This Week
  • My Feed
  • |Posts
  • |Events
  • |MSK Innovations
  • |Power Rankings
  • |Masterclasses
  • |Technology Awards
  • Press Releases
  • |Advertising
  • |Job Board
  • Spine
  • ◆Joints
  • ◆Upper Extremities
  • ◆Foot & Ankle
  • ◆Sports Medicine
  • ◆Pain Mgmt
  • ◆Trauma
  • ◆Biologics
  • ◆Technology
  • ◆People
  • ◆Company News
  • ◆Legal & Regulatory
Home/Legal & Regulatory and Reimbursement/FDA Tackles Antibiotic Cements and Implants With Growth Factors
Legal & Regulatory and Reimbursement

FDA Tackles Antibiotic Cements and Implants With Growth Factors

August 1, 2019 2 min read Premium comments

Advertisement

FDA Tackles Antibiotic Cements and Implants With Growth Factors
Source: uptimeinstitute.com
Secondary#fdaguidance#growthfactors#antibioticcement

In 2016, the FDA issued a final rule on postmarket reporting for combination drugs.

Orthopedic combination products include implants with growth factors and antibiotic loaded bone cements.

The rule seemed to create more questions and concerns than answers, so on July 22, 2019, the agency issued a 44-page final guidance explaining how to comply with the 2016 final rule.

For instance, AdvaMed, had requested detailed tables outlining the requirements and illustrating various scenarios and expectations.

The Guidance titled: Postmarketing Safety Reporting for Combination Products can be accessed here.

Defining Combo Product

The FDA defines a combination product as: “A combination product is a product composed of any combination of a drug, a device, and a biological product. Each drug, device, and biological product included in a combination product is referred to as a “constituent part” of the combination product.”

According to a report from Transparency Market Research, the drug device combination products market, (Drug Eluting Stents, Infusion Pumps, Photosensitizers, Orthopedic Combination Products, Wound Care Combination Products, Inhalers, Transdermal Patches, Intraocular Implants and Drug Eluting Beads), is expected to reach an estimated value of $115.1 billion by 2019.

Advertisement

Guidance Outline

MedtechDive reports the guidance outlines how to submit reports and avoid duplication. It also explains recordkeeping requirements, with examples for both drug and device-led products, including detailed charts showing which content is required in reports under the rule and when they are due to FDA.

It also spells out which products are subject to the final rule and provides hypothetical scenarios illustrating how to comply with various requirements, including reporting triggers and timeframes.

According to the FDA, combination product will be assigned to an agency center that will have primary jurisdiction for that combination product’s regulation. Assignment of the combination product to a lead Center is based on a determination of which constituent part provides the primary mode of action (PMOA) of the combination product.

“If, for example, the PMOA of a device-biological product combination product is attributable to the biological product constituent part, the center responsible for premarket review of such a biological product would have primary jurisdiction for the regulation of the combination product.”

FDA Principal Deputy Commissioner Amy Abernethy said, “Today, the FDA is taking another step to help applicants better comply with important product postmarketing safety reporting requirements and provide us timely, comprehensive safety information about combination products at established intervals.

The FDA will begin to enforce the additional constituent part-based requirements in July 2020 for most combination products and January 2021 for vaccine combination products.

React:

Discussion

14
DS
Dr. Sarah MitchellOrthopedic Surgeon · Mayo Clinic

This is a fascinating development. In my practice we've seen similar outcomes with the revised protocol. The key differentiator seems to be patient selection criteria. Has anyone else noticed the correlation with BMI thresholds?

8
JT
James Thornton, MDSpine Fellow · HSS

Great point. I'd push back slightly on the conclusion, the sample size in the cited study is too small to draw population-level inferences. That said, the directional signal is compelling and worth a larger RCT.

5
RP
R. PatelSports Medicine · Stanford

We implemented a similar approach last year. Early results are promising but we're still gathering 12-month follow-up data. Happy to share our protocol if anyone is interested.

Join the conversation

Orthopedic professionals are discussing this. Sign in and upgrade to read every comment and add your voice.

Subscribe

Get Full Access

Read every OTW article and join member discussions for $24.99/month.

Get Full Access

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Orthopedics This Week

The most trusted source in orthopedic industry news since 2005. Covering spine, joints, trauma, biologics, and the business of orthopedics.

A publication of RRY Publications, LLC

LinkedInXFacebook

Categories

  • Spine
  • Joints
  • Upper Extremities
  • Foot & Ankle
  • Sports Medicine
  • Pain Mgmt
  • Trauma
  • Biologics
  • Technology
  • People
  • Company News
  • Legal & Regulatory

Resources

  • Subscribe
  • Community Posts
  • Job Board
  • Press Release Opportunities
  • Power Rankings
  • About OTW
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us

Get Full Access

Unlimited articles, community posts, and Power Rankings.

Get Full Access

Plans start at $24.99/mo · Annual saves 20%

© 2026 Orthopedics This Week · RRY Publications, LLC

Privacy PolicyTerms of ServiceCookie Policy