Head of Regulatory Affairs
Regulatory strategy development, submission management, and global market access for medical device organizations.
Table of Contents
Regulatory Strategy Workflow
Develop regulatory strategy aligned with business objectives and product characteristics.
Workflow: New Product Regulatory Strategy
Gather product information:
- Intended use and indications
- Device classification (risk level)
- Technology platform
- Target markets and timeline
Identify applicable regulations per target market:
- FDA (US): 21 CFR Part 820, 510(k)/PMA/De Novo
- EU: MDR 2017/745, Notified Body requirements
- Other markets: Health Canada, PMDA, NMPA, TGA
Determine optimal regulatory pathway:
- Compare submission types (510(k) vs De Novo vs PMA)
- Assess predicate device availability
- Evaluate clinical evidence requirements
Develop regulatory timeline with milestones
Estimate resource requirements and budget
Identify regulatory risks and mitigation strategies
Obtain stakeholder alignment and approval
Validation: Strategy document approved; timeline accepted; resources allocated
Regulatory Pathway Selection Matrix
| Factor | 510(k) | De Novo | PMA |
|---|---|---|---|
| Predicate Available | Yes | No | N/A |
| Risk Level | Low-Moderate | Low-Moderate | High |
| Clinical Data | Usually not required | May be required | Required |
| Review Time | 90 days (MDUFA) | 150 days | 180 days |
| User Fee | ~$22K (2024) | ~$135K | ~$440K |
| Best For | Me-too devices | Novel low-risk | High-risk, novel |
Regulatory Strategy Document Template
REGULATORY STRATEGY
Product: [Name]
Version: [X.X]
Date: [Date]
1. PRODUCT OVERVIEW
- Intended use: [Statement]
- Device classification: [Class I/II/III]
- Technology: [Description]
2. TARGET MARKETS
| Market | Priority | Timeline |
|--------|----------|----------|
| USA | 1 | Q1 20XX |
| EU | 2 | Q2 20XX |
3. REGULATORY PATHWAY
- FDA: [510(k) / De Novo / PMA]
- EU: [Class] via [Conformity route]
- Rationale: [Justification]
4. CLINICAL EVIDENCE STRATEGY
- Requirements: [Summary]
- Approach: [Literature / Study / Both]
5. TIMELINE AND MILESTONES
[Gantt or milestone table]
6. RISKS AND MITIGATION
| Risk | Probability | Impact | Mitigation |
|------|-------------|--------|------------|
7. RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS
- Budget: $[Amount]
- Personnel: [FTEs]
- External support: [Consultants, CRO]
FDA Submission Workflow
Prepare and submit FDA regulatory applications.
Workflow: 510(k) Submission
Confirm 510(k) pathway suitability:
- Predicate device identified
- Substantial equivalence supportable
- No new intended use or technology concerns
Schedule and conduct Pre-Submission (Q-Sub) meeting if needed
Compile submission package:
- Cover letter and administrative information
- Device description and intended use
- Substantial equivalence comparison
- Performance testing data
- Biocompatibility (if patient contact)
- Software documentation (if applicable)
- Labeling and IFU
Conduct internal review and quality check
Prepare eCopy per FDA format requirements
Submit via FDA ESG portal with user fee payment
Monitor MDUFA clock and respond to AI/RTA requests
Validation: Submission accepted; MDUFA date received; tracking system updated
Workflow: PMA Submission
Confirm PMA pathway:
- Class III device or no predicate
- Clinical data strategy defined
Complete IDE clinical study if required:
- IDE approval
- Clinical protocol execution
- Study report completion
Conduct Pre-Submission meeting
Compile PMA submission:
- Administrative and device information
- Manufacturing information
- Nonclinical studies
- Clinical studies
- Labeling
Submit original PMA application
Address FDA questions and deficiencies
Prepare for FDA facility inspection
Validation: PMA approved; approval letter received; post-approval requirements documented
FDA Submission Timeline
| Milestone | 510(k) | De Novo | PMA |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pre-Sub Meeting | Day -90 | Day -90 | Day -120 |
| Submission | Day 0 | Day 0 | Day 0 |
| RTA Review | Day 15 | Day 15 | Day 45 |
| Substantive Review | Days 15-90 | Days 15-150 | Days 45-180 |
| Decision | Day 90 | Day 150 | Day 180 |
Common FDA Deficiencies
| Category | Common Issues | Prevention |
|---|---|---|
| Substantial Equivalence | Weak predicate comparison | Strong SE argument upfront |
| Performance Testing | Incomplete test protocols | Follow recognized standards |
| Biocompatibility | Missing endpoints | ISO 10993 risk assessment |
| Software | Inadequate documentation | IEC 62304 compliance |
| Labeling | Inconsistent claims | Early labeling review |
See: references/fda-submission-guide.md
EU MDR Submission Workflow
Achieve CE marking under EU MDR 2017/745.
Workflow: MDR Technical Documentation
Confirm device classification per MDR Annex VIII
Select conformity assessment route based on class:
- Class I: Self-declaration
- Class IIa/IIb: Notified Body involvement
- Class III: Full NB assessment
Select and engage Notified Body (for Class IIa+)
Compile Technical Documentation per Annex II:
- Device description and specifications
- Design and manufacturing information
- General Safety and Performance Requirements (GSPR) checklist
- Benefit-risk analysis and risk management
- Clinical evaluation per Annex XIV
- Post-market surveillance plan
Establish and document QMS per ISO 13485
Submit application to Notified Body
Address NB questions and coordinate audit
Validation: CE certificate issued; Declaration of Conformity signed; EUDAMED registration complete
MDR Classification Decision Tree
Is the device active?
│
Yes─┴─No
│ │
▼ ▼
Is it an Does it contact
implant? the body?
│ │
Yes─┴─No Yes─┴─No
│ │ │ │
▼ ▼ ▼ ▼
III IIb Check Class I
contact (measuring/
type sterile if
and applicable)
duration
Clinical Evidence Requirements by Class
| Class | Clinical Requirement | Documentation |
|---|---|---|
| I | Clinical evaluation (CE) | CE report |
| IIa | CE with literature focus | CE report + PMCF plan |
| IIb | CE with clinical data | CE report + PMCF + clinical study (some) |
| III | CE with clinical investigation | CE report + PMCF + clinical investigation |
Notified Body Selection Criteria
| Criterion | Consideration |
|---|---|
| Scope | Device category expertise |
| Capacity | Availability and review timeline |
| Experience | Track record in your technology |
| Geography | Proximity for audits |
| Cost | Fee structure transparency |
| Communication | Responsiveness and clarity |
See: references/eu-mdr-submission-guide.md
Global Market Access Workflow
Coordinate regulatory approvals across international markets.
Workflow: Multi-Market Submission Strategy
Define target markets based on business priorities
Sequence markets for efficient evidence leverage:
- Phase 1: FDA + EU (reference markets)
- Phase 2: Recognition markets (Canada, Australia)
- Phase 3: Major markets (Japan, China)
- Phase 4: Emerging markets
Identify local requirements per market:
- Clinical data acceptability
- Local agent/representative needs
- Language and labeling requirements
Develop master technical file with localization plan
Establish in-country regulatory support
Execute parallel or sequential submissions
Track approvals and coordinate launches
Validation: All target market approvals obtained; registration database updated
Market Priority Matrix
| Market | Size | Complexity | Recognition | Priority |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| USA | Large | High | N/A | 1 |
| EU | Large | High | N/A | 1-2 |
| Canada | Medium | Medium | MDSAP | 2 |
| Australia | Medium | Low | EU accepted | 2 |
| Japan | Large | High | Local clinical | 3 |
| China | Large | Very High | Local testing | 3 |
| Brazil | Medium | High | GMP inspection | 3-4 |
Documentation Efficiency Strategy
| Document Type | Single Source | Localization Required |
|---|---|---|
| Technical file core | Yes | Format adaptation |
| Risk management | Yes | None |
| Clinical data | Yes | Bridging assessment |
| QMS certificate | Yes (ISO 13485) | Market-specific audit |
| Labeling | Master label | Translation, local requirements |
| IFU | Master content | Translation, local symbols |
See: references/global-regulatory-pathways.md
Regulatory Intelligence Workflow
Monitor and respond to regulatory changes affecting product portfolio.
Workflow: Regulatory Change Management
Monitor regulatory sources:
- FDA Federal Register, guidance documents
- EU Official Journal, MDCG guidance
- Notified Body communications
- Industry associations (AdvaMed, MedTech Europe)
Assess relevance to product portfolio
Evaluate impact:
- Timeline to compliance
- Resource requirements
- Product changes needed
Develop compliance action plan
Communicate to affected stakeholders
Implement required changes
Document compliance status
Validation: Compliance action plan approved; changes implemented on schedule
Regulatory Monitoring Sources
| Source | Type | Frequency |
|---|---|---|
| FDA Federal Register | Regulations, guidance | Daily |
| FDA Device Database | 510(k), PMA, recalls | Weekly |
| EU Official Journal | MDR/IVDR updates | Weekly |
| MDCG Guidance | EU implementation | As published |
| ISO/IEC | Standards updates | Quarterly |
| Notified Body | Audit findings, trends | Per interaction |
Impact Assessment Template
REGULATORY CHANGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Change: [Description]
Source: [Regulation/Guidance]
Effective Date: [Date]
Assessment Date: [Date]
Assessed By: [Name]
AFFECTED PRODUCTS
| Product | Impact | Action Required | Timeline |
|---------|--------|-----------------|----------|
| [Name] | [H/M/L]| [Description] | [Date] |
COMPLIANCE ACTIONS
1. [Action 1] - Owner: [Name] - Due: [Date]
2. [Action 2] - Owner: [Name] - Due: [Date]
RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS
- Budget: $[Amount]
- Personnel: [Hours/FTEs]
APPROVAL
Regulatory: _________________ Date: _______
Management: _________________ Date: _______
Decision Frameworks
Pathway Selection Decision Tree
Is predicate device available?
│
Yes─┴─No
│ │
▼ ▼
Is device Is risk level
substantially Low-Moderate?
equivalent? │
│ Yes─┴─No
Yes─┴─No │ │
│ │ ▼ ▼
▼ ▼ De Novo PMA
510(k) Consider required
De Novo
or PMA
Pre-Submission Meeting Decision
| Factor | Schedule Pre-Sub | Skip Pre-Sub |
|---|---|---|
| Novel Technology | ✓ | |
| New Intended Use | ✓ | |
| Complex Testing | ✓ | |
| Uncertain Predicate | ✓ | |
| Clinical Data Needed | ✓ | |
| Well-established | ✓ | |
| Clear Predicate | ✓ | |
| Standard Testing | ✓ |
Regulatory Escalation Criteria
| Situation | Escalation Level | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Submission rejection | VP Regulatory | Root cause analysis, strategy revision |
| Major deficiency | Director | Cross-functional response team |
| Timeline at risk | Management | Resource reallocation review |
| Regulatory change | VP Regulatory | Portfolio impact assessment |
| Safety signal | Executive | Immediate containment and reporting |
Tools and References
Scripts
| Tool | Purpose | Usage |
|---|---|---|
| regulatory_tracker.py | Track submission status and timelines | python regulatory_tracker.py |
Regulatory Tracker Features:
Track multiple submissions across markets
Monitor status and target dates
Identify overdue submissions
Generate status reports
References
| Document | Content |
|---|---|
| fda-submission-guide.md | FDA pathways, requirements, review process |
| eu-mdr-submission-guide.md | MDR classification, technical documentation, clinical evidence |
| global-regulatory-pathways.md | Canada, Japan, China, Australia, Brazil requirements |
| iso-regulatory-requirements.md | ISO 13485, 14971, 10993, IEC 62304, 62366 requirements |
Key Performance Indicators
| KPI | Target | Calculation |
|---|---|---|
| First-time approval rate | >85% | (Approved without major deficiency / Total submitted) × 100 |
| On-time submission | >90% | (Submitted by target date / Total submissions) × 100 |
| Review cycle compliance | >95% | (Responses within deadline / Total requests) × 100 |
| Regulatory hold time | <20% | (Days on hold / Total review days) × 100 |
Related Skills
| Skill | Integration Point |
|---|---|
| mdr-745-specialist | Detailed EU MDR technical requirements |
| fda-consultant-specialist | FDA submission deep expertise |
| quality-manager-qms-iso13485 | QMS for regulatory compliance |
| risk-management-specialist | ISO 14971 risk management |