Navigating FDA Review Times in a Shifting Political Landscape: What MedTech Companies and Investors Need to Know
The regulatory landscape for medical devices is a critical factor for companies navigating the path to market. Recently, there has been significant discussion around FDA review times, particularly in light of recent staffing reductions and broader government efficiency initiatives. After analyzing various factors and consulting with industry leaders, we believe there is reason for cautious optimism. Here’s why:
*One major assumption is the administration does not implement a second reduction in force. In a future post, we will delve into the impact of a potential second wave of cuts and the reduction of AI experts at the FDA and what it means for stakeholders.
Stable Staffing Levels
One of the primary concerns for medical device companies is the potential impact of staffing changes at the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH). While recent presidential action has led to a reduction in force, early reports suggest that the cuts are between 10-15% and primarily affect employees with less than two years of tenure. Historically, CDRH staffing levels have grown since the implementation of user fees in 2002, while the rate of premarket applications has not increased at the same pace. This suggests that the current staffing levels, even after reductions, may still be sufficient to handle the current workload.
MDUFA User Fees as a Buffer
The Medical Device User Fee Amendments (MDUFA) have been a cornerstone of FDA funding, providing a financial buffer that helps maintain staffing levels and operational efficiency. Despite the recent layoffs, user fees continue to incentivize the FDA to meet performance goals. These mandated goals are a key performance measure for the agency, ensuring that review times remain a priority even in times of disruption.
Government Efficiency Push
There is a growing emphasis on government efficiency, which could lead to new, faster FDA review time targets. This push for efficiency aligns with broader administrative goals to streamline processes and reduce bureaucratic delays. For medical device companies, this could translate into potentially shorter review times.
Guidance Changes and Reduced Pressure on Reviewers
The removal of certain FDA guidances from the agency’s website may also play a role in improving review times. With fewer guidances in place, reviewers may face less pressure to issue deficiencies in specific areas, such as clinical trial demographic diversity. This could lead to less questions from the FDA, hence a more streamlined review process, particularly for companies that align their submissions with the remaining regulatory expectations.
Insights from Industry Leaders
Earlier this month, and before the recent reduction in force at the FDA, we had the opportunity to meet with medtech CEOs from a range of companies, from early-stage startups like Vibrato Medical to industry giants like Karl Storz. A key takeaway from these discussions at the time was a sense of optimism about the regulatory environment under the new FDA Commissioner. While there will be adjustments in areas like clinical trial design and AI submission protocols, the overall regulatory landscape for medical devices is expected to remain stable. This stability is reassuring for companies navigating the approval process.
Addressing Investor Concerns
For companies preparing to submit their devices for FDA approval, the recent changes have understandably raised concerns among investors. However, there are several reasons to believe that review times may remain stable or could potentially improve. This assumes a combination of stable staffing levels after the recent cuts, the funds from user fees being released, and government efficiency initiatives all contribute to a somewhat favorable outlook.
As one industry executive noted, “By the time we submit at the end of 2025 or early 2026, things will likely be more calm.” We believe that the current disruptions - if temporary - will mean the FDA continues to prioritize and achieve timely reviews.
Conclusion
While uncertainty remains, the factors we’ve analyzed suggest that FDA review times for medical devices may actually improve in the coming years. For companies and investors alike, this is a sign that the path to market, while challenging, may be faster. As always, staying informed and proactive in engaging with regulatory experts will be key to navigating this evolving landscape.
About the Author
Kwame Ulmer's expertise spans regulatory affairs, investment, and public service. His 23-year career includes 12 years at the FDA as a reviewer and manager and 7 years as an investor.
Talk to the FDA, before you talk to the FDA™
For more insights, connect with Kwame on LinkedIn.