skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: TU-AB-204-04: Partnerships

Abstract

The responsibilities of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have increased since the inception of the Food and Drugs Act in 1906. Medical devices first came under comprehensive regulation with the passage of the 1938 Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. In 1971 FDA also took on the responsibility for consumer protection against unnecessary exposure to radiation-emitting devices for home and occupational use. However it was not until 1976, under the Medical Device Regulation Act, that the FDA was responsible for the safety and effectiveness of medical devices. This session will be presented by the Division of Radiological Health (DRH) and the Division of Imaging, Diagnostics, and Software Reliability (DIDSR) from the Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) at the FDA. The symposium will discuss on how we protect and promote public health with a focus on medical physics applications organized into four areas: pre-market device review, post-market surveillance, device compliance, current regulatory research efforts and partnerships with other organizations. The pre-market session will summarize the pathways FDA uses to regulate the investigational use and commercialization of diagnostic imaging and radiation therapy medical devices in the US, highlighting resources available to assist investigators and manufacturers. The post-market session will explainmore » the post-market surveillance and compliance activities FDA performs to monitor the safety and effectiveness of devices on the market. The third session will describe research efforts that support the regulatory mission of the Agency. An overview of our regulatory research portfolio to advance our understanding of medical physics and imaging technologies and approaches to their evaluation will be discussed. Lastly, mechanisms that FDA uses to seek public input and promote collaborations with professional, government, and international organizations, such as AAPM, International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), Image Gently, and the Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (QIBA) among others, to fulfill FDA’s mission will be discussed. Learning Objectives: Understand FDA’s pre-market and post-market review processes for medical devices Understand FDA’s current regulatory research activities in the areas of medical physics and imaging products Understand how being involved with AAPM and other organizations can also help to promote innovative, safe and effective medical devices J. Delfino, nothing to disclose.« less

Authors:
 [1]
  1. Food & Drug Administration Center for Devices and Radiological Health (United States)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22653927
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Medical Physics; Journal Volume: 43; Journal Issue: 6; Other Information: (c) 2016 American Association of Physicists in Medicine; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES; 61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY; BIOLOGICAL MARKERS; BIOMEDICAL RADIOGRAPHY; COMPUTER CODES; DRUGS; EQUIPMENT; IMAGES; REGULATIONS; SAFETY

Citation Formats

Ochs, R. TU-AB-204-04: Partnerships. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4957391.
Ochs, R. TU-AB-204-04: Partnerships. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4957391.
Ochs, R. Wed . "TU-AB-204-04: Partnerships". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4957391.
@article{osti_22653927,
title = {TU-AB-204-04: Partnerships},
author = {Ochs, R.},
abstractNote = {The responsibilities of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have increased since the inception of the Food and Drugs Act in 1906. Medical devices first came under comprehensive regulation with the passage of the 1938 Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. In 1971 FDA also took on the responsibility for consumer protection against unnecessary exposure to radiation-emitting devices for home and occupational use. However it was not until 1976, under the Medical Device Regulation Act, that the FDA was responsible for the safety and effectiveness of medical devices. This session will be presented by the Division of Radiological Health (DRH) and the Division of Imaging, Diagnostics, and Software Reliability (DIDSR) from the Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) at the FDA. The symposium will discuss on how we protect and promote public health with a focus on medical physics applications organized into four areas: pre-market device review, post-market surveillance, device compliance, current regulatory research efforts and partnerships with other organizations. The pre-market session will summarize the pathways FDA uses to regulate the investigational use and commercialization of diagnostic imaging and radiation therapy medical devices in the US, highlighting resources available to assist investigators and manufacturers. The post-market session will explain the post-market surveillance and compliance activities FDA performs to monitor the safety and effectiveness of devices on the market. The third session will describe research efforts that support the regulatory mission of the Agency. An overview of our regulatory research portfolio to advance our understanding of medical physics and imaging technologies and approaches to their evaluation will be discussed. Lastly, mechanisms that FDA uses to seek public input and promote collaborations with professional, government, and international organizations, such as AAPM, International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), Image Gently, and the Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (QIBA) among others, to fulfill FDA’s mission will be discussed. Learning Objectives: Understand FDA’s pre-market and post-market review processes for medical devices Understand FDA’s current regulatory research activities in the areas of medical physics and imaging products Understand how being involved with AAPM and other organizations can also help to promote innovative, safe and effective medical devices J. Delfino, nothing to disclose.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4957391},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 43,
place = {United States},
year = {Wed Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2016},
month = {Wed Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2016}
}
  • This symposium highlights advanced cone-beam CT (CBCT) technologies in four areas of emerging application in diagnostic imaging and image-guided interventions. Each area includes research that extends the spatial, temporal, and/or contrast resolution characteristics of CBCT beyond conventional limits through advances in scanner technology, acquisition protocols, and 3D image reconstruction techniques. Dr. G. Chen (University of Wisconsin) will present on the topic: Advances in C-arm CBCT for Brain Perfusion Imaging. Stroke is a leading cause of death and disability, and a fraction of people having an acute ischemic stroke are suitable candidates for endovascular therapy. Critical factors that affect both themore » likelihood of successful revascularization and good clinical outcome are: 1) the time between stroke onset and revascularization; and 2) the ability to distinguish patients who have a small volume of irreversibly injured brain (ischemic core) and a large volume of ischemic but salvageable brain (penumbra) from patients with a large ischemic core and little or no penumbra. Therefore, “time is brain” in the care of the stroke patients. C-arm CBCT systems widely available in angiography suites have the potential to generate non-contrast-enhanced CBCT images to exclude the presence of hemorrhage, time-resolved CBCT angiography to evaluate the site of occlusion and collaterals, and CBCT perfusion parametric images to assess the extent of the ischemic core and penumbra, thereby fulfilling the imaging requirements of a “one-stop-shop” in the angiography suite to reduce the time between onset and revascularization therapy. The challenges and opportunities to advance CBCT technology to fully enable the one-stop-shop C-arm CBCT platform for brain imaging will be discussed. Dr. R. Fahrig (Stanford University) will present on the topic: Advances in C-arm CBCT for Cardiac Interventions. With the goal of providing functional information during cardiac interventions, significant effort has been expended to improve the quantitative accuracy of C-arm CBCT reconstructions. The challenge is to improve image quality while providing very short turnaround between data acquisition and volume data visualization. Corrections for x-ray scatter, view aliasing and patient motion that require no more than 2 iterations keep processing time short while reducing artifact. Fast, multi-sweep acquisitions can be used to permit assessment of left ventricular function, and visualization of radiofrequency lesions created to treat arrhythmias. Workflows for each imaging goal have been developed and validated against gold standard clinical CT or histology. The challenges, opportunities, and limitations of the new functional C-arm CBCT imaging techniques will be discussed. Dr. W. Zbijewski (Johns Hopkins University) will present on the topic: Advances in CBCT for Orthopaedics and Bone Health Imaging. Cone-beam CT is particularly well suited for imaging of musculoskeletal extremities. Owing to the high spatial resolution of flat-panel detectors, CBCT can surpass conventional CT in imaging tasks involving bone visualization, quantitative analysis of subchondral trabecular structure, and visualization and monitoring of subtle fractures that are common in orthopedic radiology. A dedicated CBCT platform has been developed that offers flexibility in system design and provides not only a compact configuration with improved logistics for extremities imaging but also enables novel diagnostic capabilities such as imaging of weight-bearing lower extremities in a natural stance. The design, development and clinical performance of dedicated extremities CBCT systems will be presented. Advanced capabilities for quantitative volumetric assessment of joint space morphology, dual-energy image-based quantification of bone composition, and in-vivo analysis of bone microarchitecture will be discussed, along with emerging applications in the diagnosis of arthritis and osteoporosis and assessment of novel therapies. Finally, Dr. J. Boone (UC Davis) will present on the topic: Advances in CBCT for Breast Imaging. Breast CT has been studied as an imaging tool for diagnostic breast evaluation and for potential breast cancer screening. The breast CT application lends itself to CBCT because of the small dimensions of the breast, the tapered shape of the breast towards higher cone angle, and the fact that there are no bones in the breast. The performance of various generations of breast CT scanners developed in recent years will be discussed, focusing on advances in spatial resolution and image noise characteristics. The results will also demonstrate the results of clinical trials using both computer and human observers. Learning Objectives: Understand the challenges, key technological advances, and emerging opportunities of CBCT in: Brain perfusion imaging, including assessment of ischemic stroke Cardiac imaging for functional assessment in cardiac interventions Orthopedics imaging for evaluation of musculoskeletal trauma, arthritis, and osteoporosis Breast imaging for screening and diagnosis of breast cancer. Work presented in this symposium includes research support by: Siemens Healthcare (Dr. Chen); NIH and Siemens Healthcare (Dr. Fahrig); NIH and Carestream Health (Dr. Zbijewski); and NIH (Dr. Boone)« less
  • Purpose: To evaluate a cadmium zinc telluride (CZT) detector module and to develop a proof-of-concept bench-top system to examine the concept and feasibility of a stationary spectral scanner that would consist of a CZT detector ring and a distributed source for rotationless imaging. Methods: The bench-top system employs a double-rotation set-up with two concentric but independent rotating stages, one for turning the object at sparse angles to mimic the imaging from a sequentially activated source distributed on a ring, while the other for translating the detector module to simulate a projection arc along a virtual detector ring. A source ofmore » 30-degree fan is used in the set-up, and the ring is designed to be 85cm in diameter in order to provide a 22cm field-of-view that is large enough for an average human head. The CZT detector module has 16×16 0.5mm pixels and eight global energy thresholds, and is attached to an experimental data acquisition board from the same vendor (Nova R&D). Its pixel gain is first calibrated using radioisotope Tc-99m to align the photo-peaks. Count rate performance is assessed using the X-ray source. Air and offset corrections are done prior to each CT scan. A 10cm acrylic phantom with 5 different inserts is imaged at 100kVp, 2mA, with an effective exposure window of 150ms per projection. Reconstruction is done using a total variation-type iterative method. Results: The detector module exhibited large gain variations among pixels. Average count rate was over 1Mcps per pixel. Parallax effect was observed along the arcs but was corrected. Reconstructed images from two energy bins demonstrated good contrast, spatial resolution and image uniformity, with little artifacts. Conclusion: The CZT detector tested is suitable for imaging relatively small objects. A stationary spectral CT appears feasible should we have enough buttable modules and a distributed source. This work was supported by Ministry of Science and Technology of China through grants 11YQ040082 and 2012BAI13B04.« less
  • Purpose: To substantiate the interdependency of contrast dose, radiation dose, and image quality in CT towards the patient- specific optimization of the imaging protocols Methods: The study deployed two phantom platforms. A variable sized (12, 18, 23, 30, 37 cm) phantom (Mercury-3.0) containing an iodinated insert (8.5 mgI/ml) was imaged on a representative CT scanner at multiple CTDI values (0.7–22.6 mGy). The contrast and noise were measured from the reconstructed images for each phantom diameter. Linearly related to iodine-concentration, contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), were calculated for 16 iodine-concentration levels (0–8.5 mgI/ml). The analysis was extended to a recently developed suit ofmore » 58 virtual human models (5D XCAT) with added contrast dynamics. Emulating a contrast-enhanced abdominal image procedure and targeting a peak-enhancement in aorta, each XCAT phantom was “imaged” using a simulation platform (CatSim, GE). 3D surfaces for each patient/size established the relationship between iodine-concentration, dose, and CNR. The ratios of change in iodine-concentration versus dose (IDR) to yield a constant change in CNR were calculated for each patient size. Results: Mercury phantom results show the image-quality size- dependence on CTDI and IC levels. For desired image-quality values, the iso-contour-lines reflect the trade off between contrast-material and radiation doses. For a fixed iodine-concentration (4 mgI/mL), the IDR values for low (1.4 mGy) and high (11.5 mGy) dose levels were 1.02, 1.07, 1.19, 1.65, 1.54, and 3.14, 3.12, 3.52, 3.76, 4.06, respectively across five sizes. The simulation data from XCAT models confirmed the empirical results from Mercury phantom. Conclusion: The iodine-concentration, image quality, and radiation dose are interdependent. The understanding of the relationships between iodine-concentration, image quality, and radiation dose will allow for a more comprehensive optimization of CT imaging devices and techniques, providing the methodology to balance iodine-concentration and dose based on patient’s attributes.« less
  • Current quality assurance and quality management guidelines provided by various professional organizations are prescriptive in nature, focusing principally on performance characteristics of planning and delivery devices. However, published analyses of events in radiation therapy show that most events are often caused by flaws in clinical processes rather than by device failures. This suggests the need for the development of a quality management program that is based on integrated approaches to process and equipment quality assurance. Industrial engineers have developed various risk assessment tools that are used to identify and eliminate potential failures from a system or a process before amore » failure impacts a customer. These tools include, but are not limited to, process mapping, failure modes and effects analysis, fault tree analysis. Task Group 100 of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine has developed these tools and used them to formulate an example risk-based quality management program for intensity-modulated radiotherapy. This is a prospective risk assessment approach that analyzes potential error pathways inherent in a clinical process and then ranks them according to relative risk, typically before implementation, followed by the design of a new process or modification of the existing process. Appropriate controls are then put in place to ensure that failures are less likely to occur and, if they do, they will more likely be detected before they propagate through the process, compromising treatment outcome and causing harm to the patient. Such a prospective approach forms the basis of the work of Task Group 100 that has recently been approved by the AAPM. This session will be devoted to a discussion of these tools and practical examples of how these tools can be used in a given radiotherapy clinic to develop a risk based quality management program. Learning Objectives: Learn how to design a process map for a radiotherapy process Learn how to perform failure modes and effects analysis analysis for a given process Learn what fault trees are all about Learn how to design a quality management program based upon the information obtained from process mapping, failure modes and effects analysis and fault tree analysis. Dunscombe: Director, TreatSafely, LLC and Center for the Assessment of Radiological Sciences; Consultant to IAEA and Varian Thomadsen: President, Center for the Assessment of Radiological Sciences Palta: Vice President of the Center for the Assessment of Radiological Sciences.« less
  • Purpose: Despite increased use of heterogeneity metrics for PET imaging, standards for metrics such as textural features have yet to be developed. We evaluated the quantitative variability caused by image acquisition and reconstruction parameters on PET textural features. Methods: PET images of the NEMA IQ phantom were simulated with realistic image acquisition noise. 35 features based on intensity histograms (IH), co-occurrence matrices (COM), neighborhood-difference matrices (NDM), and zone-size matrices (ZSM) were evaluated within lesions (13, 17, 22, 28, 33 mm diameter). Variability in metrics across 50 independent images was evaluated as percent difference from mean for three phantom girths (850,more » 1030, 1200 mm) and two OSEM reconstructions (2 iterations, 28 subsets, 5 mm FWHM filtration vs 6 iterations, 28 subsets, 8.6 mm FWHM filtration). Also, patient sample size to detect a clinical effect of 30% with Bonferroni-corrected α=0.001 and 95% power was estimated. Results: As a class, NDM features demonstrated greatest sensitivity in means (5–50% difference for medium girth and reconstruction comparisons and 10–100% for large girth comparisons). Some IH features (standard deviation, energy, entropy) had variability below 10% for all sensitivity studies, while others (kurtosis, skewness) had variability above 30%. COM and ZSM features had complex sensitivities; correlation, energy, entropy (COM) and zone percentage, short-zone emphasis, zone-size non-uniformity (ZSM) had variability less than 5% while other metrics had differences up to 30%. Trends were similar for sample size estimation; for example, coarseness, contrast, and strength required 12, 38, and 52 patients to detect a 30% effect for the small girth case but 38, 88, and 128 patients in the large girth case. Conclusion: The sensitivity of PET textural features to image acquisition and reconstruction parameters is large and feature-dependent. Standards are needed to ensure that prospective trials which incorporate textural features are properly designed to detect clinical endpoints. Supported by NIH grants R01 CA169072, U01 CA148131, NCI Contract (SAIC-Frederick) 24XS036-004, and a research contract from GE Healthcare.« less