Skip to content
Back to skills

079 Framework 051bca77

ASecurity

Complete framework for 510(k), De Novo, and PMA submissions to the FDA. ---

  • 9 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 0 views
  • Added October 11, 2026
testinggotestingdatabasesecurityperformance

Works with

  • cli

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned October 11, 2026

npx -y skills add tools-only/X-Skills --skill 079-framework_051bca77 --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of 079 Framework 051bca77?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for 079 Framework 051bca77
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/tools-only-079-framework-051bca77/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/tools-only-079-framework-051bca77)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

SKILL.md
# FDA Submission Guide

Complete framework for 510(k), De Novo, and PMA submissions to the FDA.

---

## Table of Contents

- [Submission Pathway Selection](#submission-pathway-selection)
- [510(k) Premarket Notification](#510k-premarket-notification)
- [De Novo Classification](#de-novo-classification)
- [PMA Premarket Approval](#pma-premarket-approval)
- [Pre-Submission Program](#pre-submission-program)
- [FDA Review Timeline](#fda-review-timeline)

---

## Submission Pathway Selection

### Decision Matrix

```
Is there a legally marketed predicate device?
├── YES → Is your device substantially equivalent?
│   ├── YES → 510(k) Pathway
│   │   ├── No changes from predicate → Abbreviated 510(k)
│   │   ├── Manufacturing changes only → Special 510(k)
│   │   └── Design/performance changes → Traditional 510(k)
│   └── NO → PMA or De Novo
└── NO → Is it a novel low-to-moderate risk device?
    ├── YES → De Novo Classification Request
    └── NO → PMA Pathway (Class III)
```

### Classification Determination

| Class | Risk Level | Pathway | Examples |
|-------|------------|---------|----------|
| I | Low | Exempt or 510(k) | Bandages, stethoscopes |
| II | Moderate | 510(k) | Powered wheelchairs, pregnancy tests |
| III | High | PMA | Pacemakers, heart valves |

### Predicate Device Search

**Database Sources:**
1. FDA 510(k) Database: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfpmn/pmn.cfm
2. FDA Product Classification Database
3. FDA PMA Database
4. FDA De Novo Database

**Search Criteria:**
- Product code (3-letter code)
- Device name keywords
- Intended use similarity
- Technological characteristics

---

## 510(k) Premarket Notification

### Required Sections (21 CFR 807.87)

#### 1. Administrative Information

```
Cover Letter
├── Submission type (Traditional/Special/Abbreviated)
├── Device name and classification
├── Predicate device(s) identification
├── Contact information
└── Signature of authorized representative

CDRH Premarket Review Submission Cover Sheet (FDA Form 3514)
├── Section A: Applicant Information
├── Section B: Device Information
├── Section C: Submission Information
└── Section D: Truth and Accuracy Statement
```

#### 2. Device Description

| Element | Required Content |
|---------|------------------|
| Device Name | Trade name, common name, classification name |
| Intended Use | Disease/condition, patient population, use environment |
| Physical Description | Materials, dimensions, components |
| Principles of Operation | How the device achieves intended use |
| Accessories | Included items, optional components |
| Variants/Models | All versions included in submission |

#### 3. Substantial Equivalence Comparison

```
Comparison Table Format:
┌────────────────────┬─────────────────┬─────────────────┐
│ Characteristic     │ Subject Device  │ Predicate       │
├────────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┤
│ Intended Use       │ [Your device]   │ [Predicate]     │
│ Technological      │                 │                 │
│ Characteristics    │                 │                 │
│ Performance        │                 │                 │
│ Safety             │                 │                 │
└────────────────────┴─────────────────┴─────────────────┘

Substantial Equivalence Argument:
1. Same intended use? YES/NO
2. Same technological characteristics? YES/NO
3. If different technology, does it raise new safety/effectiveness questions? YES/NO
4. Performance data demonstrates equivalence? YES/NO
```

#### 4. Performance Testing

**Bench Testing:**
- Mechanical/structural testing
- Electrical safety (IEC 60601-1 if applicable)
- Biocompatibility (ISO 10993 series)
- Sterilization validation
- Shelf life/stability testing
- Software verification (IEC 62304 if applicable)

**Clinical Data (if required):**
- Clinical study summaries
- Literature review
- Adverse event data

#### 5. Labeling

**Required Elements:**
- Instructions for Use (IFU)
- Device labeling (package, carton)
- Indications for Use statement
- Contraindications, warnings, precautions
- Advertising materials (if applicable)

### 510(k) Acceptance Checklist

```markdown
## Pre-Submission Verification

- [ ] FDA Form 3514 complete and signed
- [ ] User fee payment ($21,760 for FY2024, small business exemptions available)
- [ ] Device description complete
- [ ] Predicate device identified with 510(k) number
- [ ] Substantial equivalence comparison table
- [ ] Indications for Use statement (FDA Form 3881)
- [ ] Performance data summary
- [ ] Labeling (IFU, device labels)
- [ ] 510(k) summary or statement
- [ ] Truthful and Accuracy statement signed
- [ ] Environmental assessment or categorical exclusion
```

---

## De Novo Classification

### Eligibility Criteria

1. Novel device with no legally marketed predicate
2. Low-to-moderate risk (would be Class I or II if predicate existed)
3. General controls alone (Class I) or with special controls (Class II) provide reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness

### Required Content

#### Risk Assessment

```
Risk Analysis Requirements:
├── Hazard Identification
│   ├── Biological hazards
│   ├── Mechanical hazards
│   ├── Electrical hazards
│   ├── Use-related hazards
│   └── Cybersecurity hazards (if applicable)
├── Risk Estimation
│   ├── Probability of occurrence
│   ├── Severity of harm
│   └── Risk level (High/Medium/Low)
├── Risk Evaluation
│   ├── Acceptability criteria
│   └── Benefit-risk analysis
└── Risk Control Measures
    ├── Design controls
    ├── Protective measures
    └── Information for safety
```

#### Proposed Classification

| Classification | Controls | Rationale |
|----------------|----------|-----------|
| Class I | General controls only | Low risk, general controls adequate |
| Class II | General + Special controls | Moderate risk, special controls needed |

#### Special Controls (for Class II)

Define specific controls such as:
- Performance testing requirements
- Labeling requirements
- Post-market surveillance
- Patient registry
- Design specifications

---

## PMA Premarket Approval

### PMA Application Contents

#### Technical Sections

1. **Device Description and Intended Use**
   - Detailed design specifications
   - Operating principles
   - Complete indications for use

2. **Manufacturing Information**
   - Manufacturing process description
   - Quality system information
   - Facility registration

3. **Nonclinical Laboratory Studies**
   - Bench testing results
   - Animal studies (if applicable)
   - Biocompatibility testing

4. **Clinical Investigation**
   - IDE number and approval date
   - Clinical protocol
   - Clinical study results
   - Statistical analysis
   - Adverse events

5. **Labeling**
   - Complete labeling
   - Patient labeling (if applicable)

#### Clinical Data Requirements

```
Clinical Study Design:
├── Study Objectives
│   ├── Primary endpoint(s)
│   └── Secondary endpoint(s)
├── Study Population
│   ├── Inclusion criteria
│   ├── Exclusion criteria
│   └── Sample size justification
├── Study Design
│   ├── Randomized controlled trial
│   ├── Single-arm study with OPC
│   └── Other design with justification
├── Statistical Analysis Plan
│   ├── Analysis populations
│   ├── Statistical methods
│   └── Handling of missing data
└── Safety Monitoring
    ├── Adverse event definitions
    ├── Stopping rules
    └── DSMB oversight
```

### IDE (Investigational Device Exemption)

**When Required:**
- Significant risk device clinical studies
- Studies not exempt under 21 CFR 812.2

**IDE Application Content:**
- Investigational plan
- Manufacturing information
- Investigator agreements
- IRB approvals
- Informed consent forms
- Labeling
- Risk analysis

---

## Pre-Submission Program

### Q-Submission Types

| Type | Purpose | FDA Response |
|------|---------|--------------|
| Pre-Sub | Feedback on planned submission | Written feedback or meeting |
| Informational | Share information, no feedback | Acknowledgment only |
| Study Risk | Determination of study risk level | Risk determination |
| Agreement/Determination | Binding agreement on specific issue | Formal agreement |

### Pre-Sub Meeting Preparation

```
Pre-Submission Package:
1. Cover letter with meeting request
2. Device description
3. Regulatory history (if any)
4. Proposed submission pathway
5. Specific questions (maximum 5-6)
6. Supporting data/information

Meeting Types:
- Written response only (default)
- Teleconference (90 minutes)
- In-person meeting (90 minutes)
```

### Effective Question Formulation

**Good Question Format:**
```
Question: Does FDA agree that [specific proposal] is acceptable for [specific purpose]?

Background: [Brief context - 1-2 paragraphs]

Proposal: [Your specific proposal - detailed but concise]

Rationale: [Why you believe this is appropriate]
```

**Avoid:**
- Open-ended questions ("What should we do?")
- Multiple questions combined
- Questions already answered in guidance

---

## FDA Review Timeline

### Standard Review Times

| Submission Type | FDA Goal | Typical Range |
|----------------|----------|---------------|
| 510(k) Traditional | 90 days | 90-150 days |
| 510(k) Special | 30 days | 30-60 days |
| 510(k) Abbreviated | 30 days | 30-60 days |
| De Novo | 150 days | 150-300 days |
| PMA | 180 days | 12-24 months |
| Pre-Sub Response | 70-75 days | 60-90 days |

### Review Process Stages

```
510(k) Review Timeline:
Day 0: Submission received
Day 1-15: Acceptance review
├── Accept → Substantive review begins
└── Refuse to Accept (RTA) → 180 days to respond

Day 15-90: Substantive review
├── Additional Information (AI) request stops clock
├── Interactive review may occur
└── Decision by Day 90 goal

Decision:
├── Substantially Equivalent (SE) → Clearance letter
├── Not Substantially Equivalent (NSE) → Appeal or new submission
└── Withdrawn
```

### Additional Information Requests

**Response Best Practices:**
- Respond within 30-60 days
- Use FDA's question numbering
- Provide complete responses
- Include amended sections clearly marked
- Reference specific guidance documents

---

## Submission Best Practices

### Document Formatting

- Use PDF format (PDF/A preferred)
- Bookmarks for each section
- Hyperlinks to cross-references
- Table of contents with page numbers
- Consistent headers/footers

### eSTAR (Electronic Submission Template)

FDA's recommended electronic submission format for 510(k):
- Structured data entry
- Built-in validation
- Automatic formatting
- Reduced RTA rate

### Common Refuse to Accept (RTA) Issues

| Issue | Prevention |
|-------|------------|
| Missing user fee | Verify payment before submission |
| Incomplete Form 3514 | Review all fields, ensure signature |
| Missing predicate | Confirm predicate is legally marketed |
| Inadequate device description | Include all models, accessories |
| Missing Indications for Use | Use FDA Form 3881 |
| Incomplete SE comparison | Address all characteristics |

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…

Newsletter

Get the weekly list of safe new skills, and the ones we pulled.