"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."

Margaret Mead
Original article
peer-reviewed

Radiation Oncology Device Approval in the United States and Canada



Abstract

Background

Medical devices are a crucial component in the field of radiation oncology. The review and licensing of radiation oncology devices (RODs) is managed on a national basis in Canada by Health Canada and in the United States by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The purpose of this study was to examine differences in ROD licensing timelines between Health Canada and the FDA that may impact the ability of Canadians to access the most up-to-date radiation oncology care.

Methods

A list of ROD was compiled by searching keywords, manufacturers, and proprietary device names in the publicly accessible Canadian Medical Devices Active Licence Listing (MDALL) and the American Establishment Registration & Device Listing and the 510(k) Premarket Notification database. ROD licensing dates were then obtained through both databases. ROD were included if they were licensed in both countries.

Results

A total of 51 RODs were included in this study and it was found that 71% (36/51) were issued licenses for sale in the United States before Canada, at a mean of 506 days sooner (median [IQR] = 282 [326.5]). No trends in licensing dates were found by stratifying devices by type. Analyses were limited to the date of licensing only, as Health Canada provided no publicly-available information regarding submission milestones such as first submission date for the RODs studied.

Conclusions

The majority of radiation oncology devices examined were licensed for sale in the USA before Canada. Due to the absence of publicly available information regarding initial ROD application date, we cannot evaluate the impact of the approval process on the overall difference in licensing date. Importantly, this research highlights a lack of publicly-available information from Health Canada regarding the medical device approval process for the radiation oncology devices studied herein.

Introduction

Radiation oncology is a field dependent on the availability of the medical devices, including linear accelerators, brachytherapy technologies, patient imaging and monitoring devices, quality assurance (QA) tools, and treatment planning software [1]. With the rapid evolution of radiation oncology devices (RODs) and technology, there is a constant desire by both patients and health care providers to have the most up-to-date technology in use at Canada’s cancer centers [1]

The introduction of a medical device to the Canadian market is a complicated process that is regulated by the Medical Devices Regulations of the Food and Drugs Act and overseen by the Therapeutic Products Directorate through the Medical Device Bureau, both contained within Health Canada [2]. Specifically, the Medical Devices Bureau reviews applications for new medical device licenses and contributes to the policy and development of new medical device regulations [3]. Many radiation oncology devices are additionally regulated in accordance with the Class II Nuclear Facilities and Prescribed Equipment Regulations under the Nuclear Safety and Control Act (NSCA) by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) [4].

The United States of America has similar provisions; medical device approvals and regulations are mainly covered by the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA), while the Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is responsible for regulating medical devices in the US market [5]. RODs, in particular, are governed through the Radiation Control provisions of the Radiation Control for Health and Safety Act of 1968 [6] and the United States Food and Drug Administration’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) is responsible for regulating radiation-emitting electronic products [7].

A recent comparison of oncology drug approval time between Health Canada and the FDA found that on average, the time from submission to Health Canada to approval for oncology drugs is three months longer than the same process at the FDA [8]. Similarly, a comparison of all novel therapeutic agents submitted to Health Canada, the FDA, and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) found that on average the FDA reviewed applications for novel therapeutics 44 to 71 days more quickly than Health Canada or the EMA [9]. The authors also found that among drugs approved in the United States and Canada, 86% were first approved in the United States, and the drugs available a median of 355 days earlier in the United States.

A review of current literature identified no published research similarly comparing approval times for RODs in the USA and Canada. The objective of the project was therefore to compare licensing dates for RODs that are approved for sale in both Canada and the USA.

Materials & Methods

We used only publicly accessible information and data to ensure transparency and reproducibility of our findings. To generate a list of RODs that are currently licensed for sale in Canada, a thorough search of Health Canada’s Medical Devices Active Licence Listing, MDALL (https://health-products.canada.ca/mdall-limh/index-eng.jsp), was performed. Search criteria included but were not limited to: keyword searches (Radiation, Linear Accelerator, LINAC, Brachytherapy, Proton, Gamma), company names (Accuray, Brainlab, Elekta Limited, Philips, Theragenics Corporation, Siemens, Varian Medical Systems, Xoft Inc.), and proprietary device names (Novalis, AlignRT, CyberKnife, Aria, MRIDIAN, TrueBeam). Additionally, vendor and exhibitor lists from the American Association of Physicists in Medicine 2017 Annual Scientific Meeting were used to generate additional MDALL search terms including additional ROD manufacturers (Augmentix, Best Medical Canada, C-Rad Positioning, IRT Systems, IsoAid, Mevion Medical Systems, MIM Software Inc., Mobius Medical Systems, Oncology Systems Limited, Raysearch Laboratories, Scandidos, Sensus Healthcare, Sun Nuclear Corporation, Viewray Incorporated, Vision RT Limited). For each entry, the license device first issue date was abstracted for further analyses. Our search was limited to devices issued licenses between January 1, 2000 and July 2, 2018, in order to capture only contemporary devices currently in use.

Once a list of devices licensed for sale in Canada was generated, each device was searched for in the following United States FDA databases: Establishment Registration & Device Listing (https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfRL/rl.cfm) and 510(k) Premarket Notification (https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfPMN/pmn.cfm). In order to be included in the study dataset, exact matches were required for device name, version, and applicant/company of manufacture. Any device not matching all three criteria were excluded from the dataset. As with the Canadian database, the license device first issue date for each entry was collected.

Once the database was populated with precisely matched devices found in both American and Canadian databases, entries were stratified into the following categories: general accessories (e.g., patient positioning system, shielding device, etc.), brachytherapy technology, imaging and monitoring accessory, linear accelerator, proton accelerator, quality assurance device (QA), superficial radiotherapy device, and treatment planning/record & verify software. Data were then analyzed to determine differences in licensing dates between the United States and Canada. Date difference data were assessed qualitatively for observable trends between the country of licensing and device category.

Results

A total of 51 devices matched the inclusion criteria for this study (Supplementary Table 1, see Appendix) and were subcategorized as follows: two general accessories, six brachytherapy technology devices, four imaging and monitoring accessories, 13 linear accelerators, one proton accelerator, seven QA devices, one superficial radiotherapy device, and 17 treatment planning/record & verify software packages. Data from the linear accelerator category can be seen in Table 1. Seventy-four (74) devices were excluded due to a lack of exact match of device name, version, company, or due to being licensed for sale in one country or not the other. A listing of excluded devices can be found in Supplementary Table 2 (see Appendix).

Device name Company CAN issue date USA issue date Difference in days (USA before CAN) Difference in days (CAN before USA)
Mridian Linac System Viewray Incorporated 2-Aug-17 24-Feb-17 159  
Oncor Expression Digital Linear Accelerator Siemens 28-Aug-06 15-Mar-06 166  
Artiste Mv - Linear Accelerator Siemens 12-Aug-08 27-Dec-07 229  
Halcyon Medical Linear Accelerator Varian Medical Systems, Inc 6-Jul-18 27-Jun-17 374  
Tomotherapy Treatment System Tomohd Accuray 27-Nov-13 29-Aug-12 455  
Radixact Treatment Delivery System Accuray 2-Oct-17 24-Jun-16 465  
Novalis (Shaped Beam Surgery System) Brainlab Ag 2-Dec-03 3-Nov-00 1124  
Cyberknife Robotic Radiosurgery System - 1000 Mu/Minute Linear Accelerator Accuray 16-Aug-06 30-Oct-06   75
Brainscan Stereotactic Radiosurgery System Brainlab Ag 8-Feb-00 13-Jul-00   156
Leksell Gamma Knife Perfexion Elekta Instrument Ab 30-Aug-06 5-Mar-07   187
Truebeam Varian Medical Systems, Inc 2-Dec-10 18-Aug-11   259
Cyberknife M6 Series System Accuray 23-Oct-13 7-Jan-15   441
Cyberknife Vsi Robotic Radiosurgery System Accuray 18-Mar-11 26-Oct-12   588

In total, 36 (71%) of the 51 devices were licensed for sale in the USA before Canada (Figure 1). Devices were licensed in the USA a mean of 506 days before Canada (median [interquartile range]: 283 [327 days]). Of the 15 devices licensed for sale in Canada before the USA, the mean difference was 571 days (median [interquartile range]: 187 [369 days]). These data can be found in Table 2

Total number of devices examined 51
Number of devices licensed for sale in the USA before Canada 36
Number of devices licensed for sale in Canada before the USA 15
Devices licensed in the USA before Canada (36/51)  
Mean difference [St.Dev] in licensing date (days) 506 [639.4]
Median [IQR] difference in licensing date (days) 282 [326.5]
Devices licensed in Canada before the USA (15/51)  
Mean difference in [St.Dev] licensing date (days) 572 [1168.1]
Median [IQR] difference in licensing date (days) 187 [369.0]

The results for each category are summarized in Table 3. Of the eight device categories examined, the majority of devices were listed for sale in the USA first in seven categories (88%). The minimum difference in days was found to be 94, while the maximum was 3470 days. The one ROD category where the majority were licensed in Canada first was a superficial radiotherapy device. The single device was licensed in Canada 194 days prior to the USA. Additionally, the devices examined had 24 unique manufacturers. Stratifying these data by the company of manufacture failed to reveal any trend towards favoring licensure in Canada or the United States first; however, it is difficult to draw conclusions from these results as 17/24 (71%) of the examined manufacturers had two devices or fewer included in this dataset. 

Category Total devices Number licensed in USA first Median days difference  (IQR) Number licensed in Canada first Median days difference  (IQR)
Accessory 2 1 244 (n/a) 1 871 (n/a)
Brachytherapy technology 6 4 273 (197) 2 156 (17)
Imaging & Monitoring Accessory 4 4 1124 (477) 0 n/a
Linear Accelerator 13 7 374 (214) 6 187 (209)
Proton Accelerator 1 1 949 (0) n/a n/a
Quality Assurance 7 4 229 (198) 3 158 (117)
Superficial RT 1 0 n/a 1 194 (n/a)
Treatment Planning/Record & Verify Software 17 15 283 (290) 2 2477 (380)

Discussion

Our analysis of licensing date for radiation oncology devices in the United States and Canada from 2000 to 2018 reveals that 71% (36/51) of the devices licensed for sale over that timeframe was licensed in the United States before Canada, a mean of 506 days (1.4 years) earlier. Given that Canada has 43 cancer centers, while the United States has approximately 1500 cancer centers, it is not surprising that companies may choose to go to market in the USA first [10]. From a financial standpoint, the medical device market in the United States is much larger than the Canadian market: SelectUSA, a government program led by the U.S. Department of Commerce, estimates that the United States represents the largest medical device market in the world at US$156 billion (40% of the global medical device market) in 2017 [11], while estimates from the Government of Canada put the Canadian market at US$6.7 billion (6% of the global medical device market) in 2016 [12]. Additionally, we found that 13 out of the 24 companies (54%) included in this study were founded, or had their worldwide headquarters within the USA. This may represent another explanatory variable for our results. No specific trends in licensing date and time were identified by stratifying the devices by category (Table 3).

Licensing fees do not appear to be an explanatory variable for why the majority of RODs are licensed for sale in the United States before Canada. Indeed, medical device costs appear to be much lower for entering the Canadian market: submitting a device for a Medical Device Establishment Licence through Health Canada costs $8,272 CAD [13], applying for the Medical Device Licence Application Review for a Class III device (the majority RODs studied here were Class III) costs $9,881 CAD [14], and the annual Right to Sell Licensed Class II, III, or IV Medical Devices $383 CAD [15]. Fees for the FDA are dependent on whether or not a predicate device has already been approved: If a substantially equivalent predicate legally marketed device exists, a new application through the 510(k) process will cost $10,566 USD ($2,642 USD if the applicant is a Small Business) [16]. If no predicate device is found, a Premarket Approval review will be required at a cost of $310,764 USD (Small business $77,691 USD) [16]. Additionally, there is an Annual Establishment Registration Fee of $4,624 USD [16]. Based on these values, Canadian medical device licensing fees do not appear to be a barrier for bringing RODs to market in Canada.

Unfortunately, without information regarding the initial ROD licensing application date, we are unable to draw any conclusion about whether differences in licensing dates are due to manufacturers applying earlier in one country, or if the delay is in the approvals process itself.

An important issue that we feel should be addressed, is a lack of publicly-available information by Health Canada in the area of medical device licensing. The intended goal of this project was to examine the length of time required for the approval of a medical device in Canada and the United States, from initial submission date to final approval. As previously discussed, this topic has been explored for novel therapeutic agents [9] and specifically for oncology drugs [8]. Unfortunately, the Medical Devices Active Licence Listing (MDALL) database maintained by Health Canada does not publicly provide date of license submission. In comparison, both submission and approval dates are publicly available through the United States FDA databases, the Establishment Registration and Device Listing and 510(k) Premarket Notification database. A comparison of the Canadian and American database output can be seen in Table 4. According to Health Canada’s website, Summary Basis of Decision (SBD) documents are generated for drugs and medical devices for sale in Canada and document regulatory, safety, effectiveness and quality (chemistry and manufacturing) considerations. SBD provide a detailed timeline of submission milestones including submission filing date, completion dates for multiple quality control evaluations, and the Notice of Compliance (NOC) issue date (the NOC is issued following the satisfactory review of a submission for a new drug, and signifies compliance with the Food and Drug Regulations [17-18]). Unfortunately, Health Canada has chosen to only “publish 5-7 SBDs per year for newly licensed Class III and IV devices with novel technology” [19], so information related to dates of submission milestones for the majority of medical devices are not publicly-available. Attempts to acquire additional submission timeline information from the Medical Devices Bureau (MDB) were redirected to request information for each device under the Access to Information Act (https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/corporate/contact-us/access-information-privacy-division.html).

Category FDA 510(k) Health Canada MDALL
Unique Device/Licence identifiers x x
Device name x x
Device classification x x
Manufacturer information x x
Licence issue date x x
Application received date x  
Manufacturer contact x  
Relevant Federal Regulations number x  
Review panel information x  
PDF summary of decision x  
Unique company identifier   x

It is important to discuss the limitations of the research presented here. First, to ensure that comparisons between licensing dates were made as accurately as possible, only RODs with exact matches of the device name, version, and applicant/company of manufacture between Health Canada’s and the FDA’s database were included. However, adherence to this strict inclusion criteria resulted in the exclusion of a number of devices with subtle differences in search criteria. Second, as discussed above, we chose to base the analysis on publicly-available information, and therefore could not perform the intended analysis examining the length of time for the approval process at Health Canada vs. the FDA of the United States. Finally, this research was limited only to North America because of a lack of publicly-available information for medical devices licensed in Europe. The European Database on Medical Devices, Eudamed (https://ec.europa.eu/growth/sectors/medical-devices/market-surveillance_en), is not publicly accessible and therefore data on European radiation oncology devices was not included [20]

Conclusions

In summary, we observed that 71% of radiation oncology devices licensed for sale in both Canada and the United States between 2000 and 2018 were licensed in the United States before Canada, a mean of 506 days sooner. Due to a lack of publicly-available information from Health Canada we were unable to rule out the earlier application as a cause for this discrepancy as opposed to differences in duration of approval processes. This highlights the paucity of publicly available data regarding medical device approvals in Canada which is available in the United States.


References

  1. Connor MJ, Tringale K, Moiseenko V, et al.: Medical device recalls in radiation oncology: analysis of US Food and Drug Administration data, 2002-2015. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2017, 98:438-446. 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.02.006
  2. Ross S, Weijer C, Gafni A, Ducey A, Thompson C, Lafreniere R: Ethics, economics and the regulation and adoption of new medical devices: case studies in pelvic floor surgery. BMC Med Ethics. 2010, 11:14. 10.1186/1472-6939-11-14
  3. Therapeutic products directorate. (2019). Accessed: March 27, 2019: https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/corporate/about-health-canada/branches-agencies/health-products-food-branch/th....
  4. Class II nuclear facilities and prescribed equipment. (2019). Accessed: March 27, 2019: http://nuclearsafety.gc.ca/eng/nuclear-substances/licensing-class-II-nuclear-facilities-and-prescribed-equipment/inde....
  5. Chen YJ, Chiou CM, Huang YW, Tu PW, Lee YC, Chien CH: A comparative study of medical device regulations: US, Europe, Canada, and Taiwan. Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2018, 52:62-69. 10.1177/2168479017716712
  6. Laws and regulations (radiation-emitting products). (2018). Accessed: September 4, 2018: https://www.fda.gov/Radiation-EmittingProducts/ElectronicProductRadiationControlProgram/LawsandRegulations/ucm2007155....
  7. Getting a radiation emitting product to market. (2018). Accessed: September 4, 2018: https://www.fda.gov/Radiation-EmittingProducts/ElectronicProductRadiationControlProgram/LawsandRegulations/ucm2007155....
  8. Ezeife DA, Truong TH, Heng DY, Bourque S, Welch SA, Tang PA: Comparison of oncology drug approval between Health Canada and the US Food and Drug Administration. Cancer. 2015, 121:1688-1693. 10.1002/cncr.29246
  9. Downing NS, Aminawung JA, Shah ND, Braunstein JB, Krumholz HM, Ross JS: Regulatory review of novel therapeutics--comparison of three regulatory agencies. N Engl J Med. 2012, 366:2284-2293. 10.1056/NEJMsa1200223
  10. Bristow RE, Chang J, Ziogas A, Campos B, Chavez LR, Anton-Culver H: Impact of National Cancer Institute Comprehensive Cancer Centers on ovarian cancer treatment and survival. J Am Coll Surg. 2015, 220:940-950. 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2015.01.056
  11. The medical technology industry in the United States. (2018). Accessed: September 10, 2018: https://www.selectusa.gov/medical-technology-industry-united-states.
  12. Industry profile. (2017). Accessed: September 11, 2018: https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/lsg-pdsv.nsf/eng/h_hn01736.html.
  13. Guidance on medical device establishment licensing and medical device establishment licence fees. (2017). Accessed: September 19, 2018: https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/drugs-health-products/compliance-enforcement/establishment-licences/d....
  14. Medical device licence application review. (2018). Accessed: September 19, 2018: https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/drugs-health-products/funding-fees/fees-respect-human-drugs-medical-d....
  15. Right to sell licensed class II, III, or IV medical devices. (2018). Accessed: September 19, 2018: https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/drugs-health-products/funding-fees/fees-respect-human-drugs-medical-d....
  16. FY 2019 MDUFA user fees. (2018). Accessed: September 19, 2018: https://www.fda.gov/ForIndustry/UserFees/MedicalDeviceUserFee/ucm615142.htm..
  17. Notice of compliance (NOC) database. (2017). Accessed: September 5, 2018: https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/drugs-health-products/drug-products/notice-compliance/database.html.
  18. Summary basis of decision (SBD). (2018). Accessed: September 11, 2018: https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/drugs-health-products/drug-products/summary-basis-decision.html.
  19. Frequently asked questions: summary basis of decision (SBD) project: phase II. (2018). Accessed: September 11, 2018: https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/drugs-health-products/drug-products/summary-basis-decision/frequently....
  20. Market surveillance and vigilance. (2018). Accessed: September 12, 2018: https://ec.europa.eu/growth/sectors/medical-devices/current-directives/market-surveillance_en.

Appendices

Supplementary Table 1

Device name Classification Company CAN issue date USA issue date Date difference: USA before CAN Date difference: CAN before USA
Axxent Radiation Shield Rigid Accessory XOFT, INC., A SUBSIDIARY OF ICAD 20-Mar-12 20-Jul-11 244 n/a
Spaceoar System Accessory AUGMENIX 5-Feb-16 25-Jun-18 n/a 871
 I-seed Model AgX100 Brachytherapy THERAGENICS CORPORATION 7-Apr-11 3-Jan-11 94 n/a
Axxent Vaginal Applicator Set Brachytherapy XOFT, INC., A SUBSIDIARY OF ICAD 6-Feb-09 9-May-08 273 n/a
Radioactive Seed Localization Needle Brachytherapy ISOAID L.L.C. 19-Jan-16 5-Dec-14 410 n/a
Advantage I-125 Brachytherapy Seeds Brachytherapy ISOAID L.L.C. 4-Dec-03 7-Oct-01 788 n/a
Advantage Pd-103 Brachytherapy Seeds Brachytherapy ISOAID L.L.C. 4-Dec-03 8-Apr-04 n/a 126
Axxent Balloon Applicator Kit  AB2034 Brachytherapy XOFT, INC., A SUBSIDIARY OF ICAD 6-Feb-09 16-Jul-09 n/a 160
Exactrac Patient Positioning System Imaging & Monitoring Accessory BRAINLAB AG 25-Jan-02 14-Jul-99 926 n/a
Catalyst Imaging & Monitoring Accessory C-RAD POSITIONING AB 17-Feb-15 27-Feb-12 1086 n/a
Sentinel, Sp-001 Imaging & Monitoring Accessory C-RAD POSITIONING AB 30-Apr-14 30-Mar-09 1857 n/a
AlignRT Imaging & Monitoring Accessory VISION RT LIMITED 8-Jul-15 6-Jan-06 3470 n/a
Mridian Linac System Linear Accelerator VIEWRAY INCORPORATED 2-Aug-17 24-Feb-17 159 n/a
Oncor Expression Digital Linear Accelerator Linear Accelerator SIEMENS 28-Aug-06 15-Mar-06 166 n/a
Artiste Mv - Linear Accelerator Linear Accelerator SIEMENS 12-Aug-08 27-Dec-07 229 n/a
Halcyon Medical Linear Accelerator Linear Accelerator VARIAN MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC 6-Jul-18 27-Jun-17 374 n/a
Tomotherapy Treatment System Tomohd Linear Accelerator ACCURAY 27-Nov-13 29-Aug-12 455 n/a
 Radixact Treatment Delivery System Linear Accelerator ACCURAY 2-Oct-17 24-Jun-16 465 n/a
Novalis (Shaped Beam Surgery System) Linear Accelerator BRAINLAB AG 2-Dec-03 3-Nov-00 1124 n/a
Cyberknife Robotic Radiosurgery System - 1000 Mu/Minute Linear Accelerator Linear Accelerator ACCURAY 16-Aug-06 30-Oct-06 n/a 75
Brainscan Stereotactic Radiosurgery System Linear Accelerator BRAINLAB AG 8-Feb-00 13-Jul-00 n/a 156
Leksell Gamma Knife Perfexion Linear Accelerator ELEKTA INSTRUMENT AB 30-Aug-06 5-Mar-07 n/a 187
Truebeam Linear Accelerator VARIAN MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC 2-Dec-10 18-Aug-11 n/a 259
Cyberknife M6 Series System Linear Accelerator ACCURAY 23-Oct-13 7-Jan-15 n/a 441
Cyberknife Vsi Robotic Radiosurgery System Linear Accelerator ACCURAY 18-Mar-11 26-Oct-12 n/a 588
Mevion S250 Proton Beam Radiation Therapy System Proton Accelerator MEVION MEDICAL SYSTEMS 9-Jan-15 4-Jun-12 949 n/a
Device name Classification Company CAN issue date USA issue date Date difference: USA before CAN Date difference: CAN before USA
Delta4 Phantom+ Quality Assurance SCANDIDOS AB 18-Sep-15 19-Aug-15 30 n/a
Perfraction Quality Assurance SUN NUCLEAR CORPORATION 3-Nov-14 26-Sep-14 38 n/a
Portable Dosimeter TN-RD-90 Quality Assurance BEST MEDICAL CANADA 25-Oct-10 28-Aug-09 423 n/a
Profiler 2 Quality Assurance SUN NUCLEAR CORPORATION 7-Feb-08 22-Nov-06 442 n/a
3D Scanner Quality Assurance SUN NUCLEAR CORPORATION 29-Sep-10 1-Oct-10 n/a 2
IGM Integral Quality Monitor Quality Assurance IRT SYSTEMS GMBH 14-Sep-16 20-Oct-16 n/a 36
Mobius3d Quality Assurance MOBIUS MEDICAL SYSTEMS, LP 17-Jan-13 24-Jun-14 n/a 523
Srt-100 Superficial Radiation Therapy System Superficial Radiotherapy SENSUS HEALTHCARE 1-Nov-12 14-May-13 n/a 194
Integrity Treatment Planning/Record & Verify Software ELEKTA LIMITED 27-Jan-12 16-Dec-11 42 n/a
Aria Radiation Therapy Management Treatment Planning/Record & Verify Software VARIAN MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC 21-May-14 4-Apr-14 47 n/a
Iplan! (Stereotactic Planning Software) Treatment Planning/Record & Verify Software BRAINLAB AG 8-Dec-04 22-Oct-04 47 n/a
Mobile Mim Treatment Planning/Record & Verify Software MIM SOFTWARE INC 24-Mar-11 4-Feb-11 48 n/a
Accuray Precision Treatment Planning System Treatment Planning/Record & Verify Software ACCURAY 30-Oct-17 8-Jun-17 144 n/a
iViewDose Treatment Planning/Record & Verify Software ELEKTA LIMITED 27-May-16 11-Dec-15 168 n/a
Eclipse Treatment Planning System V13.0 Treatment Planning/Record & Verify Software VARIAN MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC 4-Sep-14 7-Feb-14 209 n/a
Raystation 5 Treatment Planning/Record & Verify Software RAYSEARCH LABORATORIES AB (PUBL) 14-Nov-16 8-Mar-16 251 n/a
Variseed 9.0 Treatment Planning/Record & Verify Software VARIAN MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC 1-Feb-16 8-May-15 269 n/a
OnQ rts Software Treatment Planning/Record & Verify Software ONCOLOGY SYSTEMS LIMITED 27-Sep-13 28-Dec-12 273 n/a
mobileMOSFET Wireless Dosimetry System Treatment Planning/Record & Verify Software BEST MEDICAL CANADA 13-Apr-05 25-Jun-04 292 n/a
Eclipse Treatment Planning System V15.5 Treatment Planning/Record & Verify Software VARIAN MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC 6-Jul-18 15-Aug-17 325 n/a
Eclipse Treatment Planning System V13.5 Treatment Planning/Record & Verify Software VARIAN MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC 28-Aug-15 7-Aug-14 386 n/a
Variseed 7.0 Treatment Planning/Record & Verify Software VARIAN MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC 31-Jan-03 12-Jul-01 568 n/a
Eclipse Treatment Planning System V6.5 Treatment Planning/Record & Verify Software VARIAN MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC 7-Jun-04 2-May-01 1132 n/a
Variseed 7.1 Treatment Planning/Record & Verify Software VARIAN MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC 11-Feb-04 21-May-04 n/a 100
Pinnacle 3 Radiation Therapy Planning System Treatment Planning/Record & Verify Software PHILIPS MEDICAL SYSTEMS (CLEVELAND), INC 28-Feb-00 14-Jun-13 n/a 4855

Supplementary Table 2

Number Device name Classification Company Canada issue date USA received date
1 ABC MOUTHPIECE AND FILTER KIT ACCESSORY AKTINA MEDICAL 01-Jun-18 n/a
2 BARD BRACHYSTAR SEED IMPLANT NEEDLE ACCESSORY CR BARD 30-May-12 n/a
3 LOGICIEL EPIGRAY ACCESSORY DOSISOFT 02-Feb-16 n/a
4 ACTIVE BREATHING CO-ORDINATOR SYSTEM ACCESSORY ELEKTA LIMITED 22-Jul-05 n/a
5 STEREOTACTIC COLLIMATOR ACCESSORY ELEKTA LIMITED 21-Jul-09 n/a
6 AGILITY ACCESSORY ELEKTA LIMITED 15-Nov-12 n/a
7 MOBIUS VERIFICATION PHANTOM ACCESSORY MOBIUS MEDICAL SYSTEMS, LP 29-Apr-15 n/a
8 DELTA4 DISCOVER ACCESSORY SCANDIDOS AB 07-Feb-18 n/a
9 QED ACCESSORY SUN NUCLEAR CORPORATION 10-Jan-08 n/a
10 ISORAD ACCESSORY SUN NUCLEAR CORPORATION 10-Jan-08 n/a
11 RF IVD2 ACCESSORY SUN NUCLEAR CORPORATION 16-Jan-08 n/a
12 EDGE DETECTOR ACCESSORY SUN NUCLEAR CORPORATION 07-Feb-08 n/a
13 SNC125C ACCESSORY SUN NUCLEAR CORPORATION 09-Nov-11 n/a
14 OPTICAL SURFACE MONITORING SYSTEM (OSMS) ACCESSORY VISION RT LIMITED 29-Jul-16 n/a
15 AXXENT SURFACE APPLICATOR SET ACCESSORY XOFT, INC., A SUBSIDIARY OF ICAD 07-Oct-10 n/a
16 IODINE 125 SEEDS BRACHYTHERAPY BEST MEDICAL INTERNATIONAL 26-Jun-01 n/a
17 IRIDIUM 192 IN NYLON RIBBONS BRACHYTHERAPY BEST MEDICAL INTERNATIONAL 26-Jun-01 n/a
18 PALLADIUM 103 BRACHYTHERAPY BEST MEDICAL INTERNATIONAL 26-Jun-01 n/a
19 GOLD 198 BRACHYTHERAPY BEST MEDICAL INTERNATIONAL 26-Jun-01 n/a
20 BRACHYTHERAPY NEEDLES - NON STAINLESS STEEL BRACHYTHERAPY BEST MEDICAL INTERNATIONAL 10-Sep-01 n/a
21 BRACHYTHERAPY NEEDLES - STAINLESS STEEL BRACHYTHERAPY BEST MEDICAL INTERNATIONAL 10-Sep-01 n/a
22 BRACHYTHERAPY IMPLANT/APPLICATOR KITS BRACHYTHERAPY BEST MEDICAL INTERNATIONAL 10-Sep-01 n/a
23 BRACHYTHERAPY MARKER KITS BRACHYTHERAPY BEST MEDICAL INTERNATIONAL 26-Sep-01 n/a
24 STYLETS FOR BRACHYTHERAPY NEEDLES BRACHYTHERAPY BEST MEDICAL INTERNATIONAL 31-May-06 n/a
25 PD-103 SOURCES PRELOADED BRACHYTHERAPY BEST MEDICAL INTERNATIONAL 26-Jul-06 n/a
26 I-125 SOURCES PRELOADED BRACHYTHERAPY BEST MEDICAL INTERNATIONAL 26-Jul-06 n/a
27 POLYACETAL BRACHYTHERAPY KITS BRACHYTHERAPY BEST MEDICAL INTERNATIONAL 08-Oct-09 n/a
28 BRACHYTHERAPY STANDARD TEMPLATES BRACHYTHERAPY BEST MEDICAL INTERNATIONAL 21-Feb-12 n/a
29 BRACHYTHERAPY DISPOSABLE TEMPLATE KITS BRACHYTHERAPY BEST MEDICAL INTERNATIONAL 21-Feb-12 n/a
30 BEST MULTI-LUMEN BALLOON APPLICATOR FOR BRACHYTHERAPY BRACHYTHERAPY BEST MEDICAL INTERNATIONAL 09-Dec-14 n/a
31 ANORECTAL (AR) APPLICATOR BRACHYTHERAPY BIONIX RADIATION THERAPY 04-Aug-17 n/a
32 ESOPHAGEAL APPLICATOR (E-APP) BRACHYTHERAPY BIONIX RADIATION THERAPY 04-Aug-17 n/a
33 BRACHYTHERAPY KIT BRACHYTHERAPY ISOAID L.L.C. 03-Jun-11 n/a
34 GUIDE FOR BRACHYTHERAPY NEEDLE BRACHYTHERAPY ISOAID L.L.C. 18-Jun-13 n/a
35 ISOLOADER SYSTEM BRACHYTHERAPY THERAGENICS CORPORATION 27-Nov-01 n/a
36 ISOCARTRIDGE BRACHYTHERAPY THERAGENICS CORPORATION 22-Apr-02 n/a
37 BRACHYTHERAPY NEEDLE BRACHYTHERAPY THERAGENICS CORPORATION 19-Sep-02 n/a
38 BRACHYTHERAPY SYNTHETIC ABSORBABLE, BRAIDED AND NON BRAIDED PLACEMENT SLEEVES BRACHYTHERAPY THERAGENICS CORPORATION 06-Feb-03 n/a
39 BRACHYTHERAPY NEEDLES BRACHYTHERAPY THERAGENICS CORPORATION 18-Jun-03 n/a
40 BRACHYTHERAPY NEEDLE SETS BRACHYTHERAPY THERAGENICS CORPORATION 18-Dec-03 n/a
41 GOLD FIDUCIARY MARKERS BRACHYTHERAPY THERAGENICS CORPORATION 18-Feb-08 n/a
42 BRACHYTHERAPY APPLICATOR KITS BRACHYTHERAPY THERAGENICS CORPORATION 30-Jan-09 n/a
43 PROSTATE SEEDING KITS (THERALOAD, THERASEED, THERASTRAND, THERASLEEVE) BRACHYTHERAPY THERAGENICS CORPORATION 09-Jul-10 n/a
44 THERASEED PD-103 DEVICE BRACHYTHERAPY THERAGENICS CORPORATION 25-Jan-11 n/a
45 AXXENT ELECTRONIC BRACHYTHERAPY SYSTEM BRACHYTHERAPY XOFT, INC., A SUBSIDIARY OF ICAD 06-Feb-09 n/a
46 MLCI2 LINAC ELEKTA LIMITED 03-Apr-09 n/a
47 ELEKTA MEDICAL LINEAR ACCELERATOR LINAC ELEKTA LIMITED 26-Aug-10 n/a
48 CHECKMATE 2 QA SUN NUCLEAR CORPORATION 16-Jan-08 n/a
49 DAILY QA 3 QA SUN NUCLEAR CORPORATION 16-Jan-08 n/a
50 DAILY QA 3 RF QA SUN NUCLEAR CORPORATION 16-Jan-08 n/a
51 TOMODOSE QA SUN NUCLEAR CORPORATION 07-Feb-08 n/a
52 SRS PROFILER QA SUN NUCLEAR CORPORATION 31-Dec-08 n/a
53 MAPCHECK 2 QA SUN NUCLEAR CORPORATION 31-Dec-08 n/a
54 IC PROFILER QA SUN NUCLEAR CORPORATION 24-Feb-09 n/a
55 PC ELECTROMETER QA SUN NUCLEAR CORPORATION 08-Jun-09 n/a
56 ARCCHECK QA SUN NUCLEAR CORPORATION 19-Aug-09 n/a
57 3DVH ANALYSIS SOFTWARE QA SUN NUCLEAR CORPORATION 16-Jun-10 n/a
58 1D SCANNER QA SUN NUCLEAR CORPORATION 11-Apr-11 n/a
59 STEREOPHAN QA SUN NUCLEAR CORPORATION 16-Jul-13 n/a
60 SNC MACHINE QA SUN NUCLEAR CORPORATION 15-May-15 n/a
61 DOSECHECK QA SUN NUCLEAR CORPORATION 19-May-16 n/a
62 MAPCHECK 3 QA SUN NUCLEAR CORPORATION 19-Sep-17 n/a
63 SUNCHECK QA SUN NUCLEAR CORPORATION 18-Dec-17 n/a
64 SRS MAPCHECK QA SUN NUCLEAR CORPORATION 31-May-18 n/a
65 RADIATION QUALITY ASSURANCE SOFTWARE (DOSELAB) SOFTWARE MOBIUS MEDICAL SYSTEMS, LP 26-Mar-11 n/a
66 SRT-100 VISION SUPERFICIAL RADIATION THERAPY SYSTEM SUPERFICIAL RT SENSUS HEALTHCARE 30-Mar-16 n/a
67 RADPOS 4-D IN-VIVO DOSIMETRY SYSTEM TN-RD-140 TREATMENT PLANNING BEST MEDICAL CANADA 30-Dec-10 n/a
68 MIM (SOFTWARE PACKAGE) TREATMENT PLANNING MIM SOFTWARE INC 03-Oct-05 n/a
69 MIMVIEWER TREATMENT PLANNING MIM SOFTWARE INC 05-Jan-09 n/a
70 RIT 113 RADIATION THERAPY DOSIMETRY SOFTWARE TREATMENT PLANNING RADIOLOGICAL IMAGING TECHNOLOGY 26-Apr-06 n/a
71 INVERSEARC 1.0 TREATMENT PLANNING RAYSEARCH LABORATORIES AB (PUBL) 01-Jun-15 n/a
72 DELTA 4PT TREATMENT PLANNING SCANDIDOS AB 26-Mar-13 n/a
73 HEXAMOTION TREATMENT PLANNING SCANDIDOS AB 21-Jan-14 n/a
74 PLANIQ TREATMENT PLANNING SUN NUCLEAR CORPORATION 23-Mar-15 n/a
Original article
peer-reviewed

Radiation Oncology Device Approval in the United States and Canada


Author Information

Craig A. Beers Corresponding Author

Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, CAN

Wendy L. Smith

Medical Physics, University of Calgary, Calgary, CAN

Sarah Weppler

Medical Physics, University of Calgary, Calgary, CAN

Colleen Schinkel

Medical Physics, University of Calgary, Calgary, CAN

Harvey Quon

Radiation Oncology, Tom Baker Cancer Centre, Calgary, CAN


Ethics Statement and Conflict of Interest Disclosures

Human subjects: All authors have confirmed that this study did not involve human participants or tissue. Animal subjects: All authors have confirmed that this study did not involve animal subjects or tissue. Conflicts of interest: In compliance with the ICMJE uniform disclosure form, all authors declare the following: Payment/services info: All authors have declared that no financial support was received from any organization for the submitted work. Financial relationships: All authors have declared that they have no financial relationships at present or within the previous three years with any organizations that might have an interest in the submitted work. Other relationships: All authors have declared that there are no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.


Original article
peer-reviewed

Radiation Oncology Device Approval in the United States and Canada


Figures etc.

PDF Share