90 FR 113 pgs. 24962-24964 - Medical Devices; Immunology and Microbiology Devices; Classification of the Cellular Analysis System for Multiplexed Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing
Type: RULEVolume: 90Number: 113Pages: 24962 - 24964
Pages: 24962, 24963, 24964Docket number: [Docket No. FDA-2025-N-1503]
FR document: [FR Doc. 2025-10787 Filed 6-12-25; 8:45 am]
Agency: Health and Human Services Department
Sub Agency: Food and Drug Administration
Official PDF Version: PDF Version
[top]
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 866
[Docket No. FDA-2025-N-1503]
Medical Devices; Immunology and Microbiology Devices; Classification of the Cellular Analysis System for Multiplexed Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION:
Final amendment; final order.
SUMMARY:
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA, the Agency, or we) is classifying the cellular analysis system for multiplexed antimicrobial susceptibility testing into class II (special controls). The special controls that apply to the device type are identified in this order and will be part of the codified language for the cellular analysis system for multiplexed antimicrobial susceptibility testing's classification. We are taking this action because we have determined that classifying the device into class II (special controls) will provide a reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness of the device. We believe this action will also enhance patients' access to beneficial innovative devices, in part by reducing regulatory burdens.
DATES:
This order is effective June 13, 2025. The classification was applicable on February 23, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ryan Lubert, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 3414, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 240-402-6357, Ryan.Lubert@fda.hhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Upon request, FDA has classified the cellular analysis system for multiplexed antimicrobial susceptibility testing as class II (special controls), which we have determined will provide a reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness. In addition, we believe this action will enhance patients' access to beneficial innovation, in part by reducing regulatory burdens by placing the device into a lower device class than the automatic class III assignment.
The automatic assignment of class III occurs by operation of law and without any action by FDA, regardless of the level of risk posed by the new device. Any device that was not in commercial distribution before May 28, 1976, is automatically classified as, and remains within, class III and requires premarket approval unless and until FDA takes an action to classify or reclassify the device (see 21 U.S.C. 360c(f)(1)). We refer to these devices as "postamendments devices" because they were not in commercial distribution prior to the date of enactment of the Medical Device Amendments of 1976, which amended the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act).
FDA may take a variety of actions in appropriate circumstances to classify or reclassify a device into class I or II. We may issue an order finding a new device to be substantially equivalent under section 513(i) of the FD&C Act to a predicate device that does not require premarket approval (see 21 U.S.C. 360c(i)). We determine whether a new device is substantially equivalent to a predicate device by means of the procedures for premarket notification under section 510(k) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360(k)) and part 807 (21 CFR part 807).
FDA may also classify a device through "De Novo" classification, a common name for the process authorized under section 513(f)(2) of the FD&C Act (see also part 860, subpart D (21 CFR part 860, subpart D)). Section 207 of the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act of 1997 (Pub. L. 105-115) established the first procedure for De Novo classification. Section 607 of the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (Pub. L. 112-144) modified the De Novo application process by adding a second procedure. A device sponsor may utilize either procedure for De Novo classification.
Under the first procedure, the person submits a 510(k) for a device that has not previously been classified. After receiving an order from FDA classifying the device into class III under section 513(f)(1) of the FD&C Act, the person then requests a classification under section 513(f)(2).
Under the second procedure, rather than first submitting a 510(k) and then a request for classification, if the person determines that there is no legally marketed device upon which to base a determination of substantial equivalence, that person requests a classification under section 513(f)(2) of the FD&C Act.
Under either procedure for De Novo classification, FDA is required to classify the device by written order within 120 days. The classification will be according to the criteria under section 513(a)(1) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360c(a)(1)). Although the device was automatically placed within class III, the De Novo classification is considered to be the initial classification of the device.
We believe this De Novo classification will enhance patients' access to beneficial innovation, in part by reducing regulatory burdens. When FDA classifies a device into class I or II via the De Novo process, the device can serve as a predicate for future devices of that type, including for 510(k)s (see section 513(f)(2)(B)(i) of the FD&C Act). As a result, other device sponsors do not have to submit a De Novo request or premarket approval application to market a substantially equivalent device (see section 513(i) of the FD&C Act, defining "substantial equivalence"). Instead, sponsors can use the less burdensome 510(k) process, when necessary, to market their device.
II. De Novo Classification
On July 14, 2016, FDA received Accelerate Diagnostics, Inc.'s request for De Novo classification of the Accelerate PhenoTest BC Kit. FDA reviewed the request in order to classify the device under the criteria for classification set forth in section 513(a)(1) of the FD&C Act.
We classify devices into class II if general controls by themselves are insufficient to provide reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness, but there is sufficient information to establish special controls that, in combination with the general controls, provide reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness of the device for its intended use (see 513(a)(1)(B) of the FD&C Act). After review of the information submitted in the request, we determined that the device can be classified into class II with the establishment of special controls. FDA has determined that these special controls, in addition to the general controls, will provide reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness of the device.
[top] Therefore, on February 23, 2017, FDA issued an order to the requestor classifying the device into class II. In this final order, FDA is codifying the classification of the device by adding 21
Footnotes:
1 ?FDA notes that the ACTION caption for this final order is styled as "Final amendment; final order," rather than "Final order." Beginning in December 2019, this editorial change was made to indicate that the document "amends" the Code of Federal Regulations. The change was made in accordance with the Office of Federal Register's (OFR) interpretations of the Federal Register Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 15), its implementing regulations (1 CFR 5.9 and parts 21 and 22), and the Document Drafting Handbook.
FDA has identified the following risks to health associated specifically with this type of device and the measures required to mitigate these risks in table 1.
| Identified risks to health | Mitigation measures |
|---|---|
| If identification assay is included, false positive or false negative results or incorrect identifications can lead to: | Special controls (1) and (2)(i). |
| • a delay in determining the true cause of the infection; | |
| • unnecessary, ineffective, or lack of antimicrobial therapy; | |
| • delayed or skipped treatments or diagnostic procedures; | |
| • inappropriate infection prevention and control measures and/or public health procedures; | |
| • interference with antimicrobial stewardship efforts. | |
| Failure to perform appropriate antimicrobial susceptibility testing may result in: | |
| • unnecessary, ineffective or lack of antimicrobial therapy; | |
| • interference with antimicrobial stewardship efforts; | |
| • development of antimicrobial resistance. | |
| An organism determined to be resistant when it is susceptible may lead to: | |
| • treatment with an ineffective antibiotic; | |
| • administration of unnecessary broad-spectrum drugs; | |
| • side effects from potent antimicrobials; | |
| • implementation of infection control measures. | |
| An organism determined to be susceptible when it is resistant may lead to: | |
| • treatment with an ineffective antibiotic; | |
| • increased morbidity or death. | |
| Errors in interpretation | Special control (2)(ii). |
| Failure to correctly operate the test system | Special control (2)(iii). |
FDA has determined that special controls, in combination with the general controls, address these risks to health and provide reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness. For a device to fall within this classification, and thus avoid automatic classification in class III, it would have to comply with the special controls named in this final order. The necessary special controls appear in the regulation codified by this final order. This device is subject to premarket notification requirements under section 510(k) of the FD&C Act.
III. Analysis of Environmental Impact
The Agency has determined under 21 CFR 25.34(b) that this action is of a type that does not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. Therefore, neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required.
IV. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This final order establishes special controls that refer to previously approved collections of information found in other FDA regulations. These collections of information are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521). The collections of information in part 860, subpart D, regarding De Novo classification have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0844; the collections of information in 21 CFR part 814, subparts A through E, regarding premarket approval have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0231; the collections of information in part 807, subpart E, regarding premarket notification submissions have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0120; the collections of information in 21 CFR part 820 regarding quality system regulation have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0073; and the collections of information in 21 CFR parts 801 and 809 regarding labeling have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0485;
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 866
Biologics, Laboratories, Medical devices.
Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR part 866 is amended as follows:
PART 866-IMMUNOLOGY AND MICROBIOLOGY DEVICES
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 866 continues to read as follows:
Authority:
21 U.S.C. 351, 360, 360c, 360e, 360j, 360 l, 371.
2. Add §?866.1650 to subpart B to read as follows:
§?866.1650 A cellular analysis system for multiplexed antimicrobial susceptibility testing.
[top] (a) Identification. A cellular analysis system for multiplexed antimicrobial susceptibility testing is a multiplex qualitative and/or quantitative in vitro diagnostic device intended for the identification and determination of the antimicrobial susceptibility results of organisms detected in samples from patients with suspected microbial infections. This device is intended to aid in the determination of antimicrobial susceptibility or resistance when used in conjunction with other laboratory findings.
(b) Classification. Class II (special controls). The special controls for this device are:
(1) Design verification and validation must include:
(i) Detailed device description documentation, including the device components, ancillary reagents required but not provided, a detailed explanation of the methodology, including primer/probe sequence, design, rationale for sequence selection, and details of the antimicrobial agents, as applicable.
(ii) Detailed documentation from the following analytical and clinical performance studies: limit of detection, inclusivity, precision, reproducibility, interference, cross-reactivity, carryover, and cross-contamination, quality control and additional studies, as applicable to specimen type and assay intended use.
(iii) Detailed documentation from an appropriate clinical study. The study, performed on a study population consistent with the intended use population, must compare the device performance to results obtained from well-accepted reference methods.
(iv) Detailed documentation for device software, including software applications and hardware-based devices that incorporate software.
(2) The labeling required under §?809.10(b) of this chapter must include:
(i) Limitations and protocols regarding the need for correlation of results by standard laboratory procedures, as applicable.
(ii) A detailed explanation of the interpretation of results and acceptance criteria.
(iii) A detailed explanation of the principles of operation and procedures for assay performance and troubleshooting.
Dated: June 9, 2025.
Grace R. Graham
Deputy Commissioner for Policy, Legislation, and International Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2025-10787 Filed 6-12-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P