TGA guidance (Oct 2025): IVD Companion Diagnostics (CDx) Requirements in Australia

What’s new

TGA IVD companion diagnostics requirements are now clearly explained in the Therapeutic Goods Administration’s guidance on IVD companion diagnostics (CDx) in Australia (updated 16 October 2025). Their revised companion diagnostics framework, adds process diagrams, a companion testing plan concept for medicine/biological sponsors, clearer clinical performance expectations, and case studies showing how the pathway works in practice.

This blog post summarises the definition of a CDx, Class 3 IVD classification, ARTG inclusion, companion testing plans, and the TGA CDx List.

What is a CDx under Australian law?

A companion diagnostic is an IVD (commercial or in‑house) that provides information essential for the safe and effective use of a corresponding medicine or biological—for patient selection, risk of serious adverse reactions, or treatment monitoring. To qualify, the test must be referenced in the Product Information (PI) for the medicine or in the Instructions for Use (IFU) of the biological. Tests used only for cell/tissue compatibility are excluded from the CDx definition.

This definition underpins the TGA IVD companion diagnostics requirements for medicines and biologicals that rely on patient selection testing.

Note: The term “a particular medicine or biological” can also cover a class of products with a similar mechanism of action, not only a single named product.

When does an indication require CDx testing?

An indication requires CDx testing when both:

  1. the medicine’s PI (or biological IFU) states that CDx testing is essential, and
  2. the CDx claims it is intended for that testing to enable use of the medicine/biological.
    This may apply to some (not all) indications of a medicine.

To aid transparency, the TGA recommends a PI “flag phrase” indicating that testing is essential and that clinical practice testing should be adequately comparable to the pivotal trial testing; the TGA also publishes a CDx List of approved tests.

How the TGA applies CDx requirements: Class 3 IVDs and ARTG inclusion

  • Classification: Under TGA IVD companion diagnostics requirements, all CDx—commercial and in-house—are Class 3 IVDs (including in‑house CDx).
  • Separate ARTG entries: Each CDx requires its own ARTG inclusion with a Unique Product Identifier (UPI) defined by the manufacturer.
  • Application audit: CDx applications are subject to a mandatory application audit unless supported by specified comparable overseas regulator documentation (e.g., EU IVDR, FDA PMA, PMDA, HSA, Health Canada).
  • Concurrent submissions: While encouraged, concurrent medicine/CDx submissions are not mandatory; however, a CDx application should only be submitted if the corresponding indication is approved or under concurrent review.

From companion testing plans to ARTG submissions, MDx CRO streamlines the end-to-end CDx pathway in Australia, aligning clinical, regulatory, and quality workstreams to the TGA’s expectations.

The companion testing plan (for medicine/biological sponsors)

Every new indication that requires CDx testing must include a companion testing plan (dated and version‑controlled) describing how Australian patients will access at least one adequate test. This is central to meeting TGA IVD companion diagnostics requirements. Four options are available:

  1. Option 1: A commercial CDx ARTG application is planned/underway (provide device submission details and sponsor contact).
  2. Option 2: An in‑house IVD CDx will be accredited under the National Pathology Accreditation Scheme (provide lab details, accreditation timeline, and quality/access reassurances).
  3. Option 3: Standard Australian testing is expected to deliver comparable clinical outcomes to the pivotal trials (provide detailed justification).
  4. Option 4: None of the above—TGA reviews full device data within the medicine dossier (appropriate when no onshore testing is expected).

If Option 4 is used, TGA may add a condition of registration requiring the sponsor to maintain and update the plan (e.g., in case of supply interruption, regulatory action, or material changes to test methodology). Approval of an indication can proceed even when no ARTG‑listed or accredited CDx is available, provided an adequate plan exists; however, a commercial CDx must be in the ARTG (or an in‑house CDx accredited) before supply in Australia.

Clinical trial assay evaluation & comparability

When an indication requires CDx testing, TGA evaluates the clinical trial assay used in the pivotal studies—reviewing scientific validity, analytical performance, clinical performance, and clinical utility. Subsequent CDx must show clinical comparability to the trial assay, typically via concordance and/or bridging studies (or other appropriate evidence) aligned to the trial assay’s core characteristics.

Responsibilities at a glance

Medicine/Biological sponsors must:

  • Use the TGA CDx identification guide to determine if CDx testing is essential.
  • Consider consequences of false positives/negatives, test failures or no result.
  • Include: (a) evidence to support evaluation of the clinical trial assay, and (b) a companion testing plan nominating at least one adequate test.
  • Note: The framework does not require a one‑to‑one link between an indication and a single proprietary CDx; it focuses on the core characteristics of testing.

Device sponsors must:

  • Submit an IVD medical device application for ARTG inclusion of the CDx (indicating the application is for a CDx and providing the UPI).
  • Demonstrate comparability to pivotal trial testing and meet Essential Principles; applications may undergo audit as above.
  • Ensure the corresponding indication is approved or under concurrent review.

In-house IVD CDx, NATA accreditation and NPAAC obligations

Pathology laboratories may develop/modify in‑house tests for use as CDx. Class 1–3 in‑house IVDs are not included in the ARTG, but require NATA accreditation, identification of CDx in the TGA notification test list, and compliance with the NPAAC standard. Under a NATA–TGA MoU, NATA can request TGA technical assistance during evaluation of in‑house CDx performance; TGA is not otherwise involved in the accreditation decision.

TGA CDx List

The TGA publishes a CDx List showing approved commercial CDx linked to corresponding indications (with in‑house CDx to be added). The list is informational (not a regulatory instrument) and may lag recent approvals by up to one month.

Transitional arrangements and change control

  • Transition: CDx previously included in the ARTG as Class 2 or 3 before 1 Feb 2020 (and certain in‑house IVDs) may continue supply until 31 Dec 2028; a new compliant application is required to continue supply thereafter.
  • Changes: Sponsors manage post‑market device changes via the TGA Device Change Request process.

Key takeaways (quick reference)

  • All CDx are Class 3 IVDs and require separate ARTG inclusion (commercial) or NATA accreditation (in‑house).
  • Every relevant medicine/biological indication must include a companion testing plan (Options 1–4).
  • TGA assesses the clinical trial assay and expects comparability evidence for subsequent CDx.
  • Approval can proceed without on‑shore CDx if a robust plan exists, but supply requires ARTG inclusion or in‑house accreditation.

FAQs

Are all CDx Class 3 IVDs in Australia?

Yes. The regulations specify all CDx (commercial and in‑house) are Class 3 IVDs.

Can an indication be approved if no Australian CDx is available yet?

Yes—if a suitable companion testing plan is in place; however, a commercial CDx must be in the ARTG (or an in‑house CDx accredited) before legal supply.

What goes into a companion testing plan?

Identify at least one adequate test and choose Option 1–4 with supporting details (e.g., ARTG application in progress, in‑house accreditation, justification that standard testing is adequate, or full device data reviewed within the medicine dossier).

Will the PI show that CDx testing is essential?

The TGA recommends a PI “flag phrase” indicating testing is essential and should be comparable to trial testing; approved tests appear on the TGA CDx List.

Written by:
Carlos Galamba

Carlos Galamba

CEO

Senior regulatory leader and advisor to top 10 global precision medicine companies with deep experience in high-risk IVDs including companion diagnostics.
Industry Insights & Regulatory Updates

IVDR CE marking NGS: MDx Case Study with Fulgent

IVDR CE marking NGS at a glance

  • Outcome: CE mark granted by TÜV SÜD for an end-to-end Class C germline NGS solution (wet lab + bioinformatics).
  • Scope: Furthermore, panel covering 4,600+ clinically relevant genes with a validated PLM (Pipeline Manager) software component; later expanded to >7,000 genes using a new probe set.
  • What we did: Specifically, we built an ISO 13485 QMS from the ground up, prepared full Annex II + III technical documentation, validated bioinformatics under IEC 62304/82304, split documentation into two Basic UDI-DIs (wet lab vs. software), and guided Stage I/II audits.
  • Why it matters: Ultimately, this demonstrates a repeatable pathway to IVDR certification for large NGS services and software—something that had no clear precedent.

Read the announcements: For details, read the Fulgent press release and Citeline case study.

The challenge: certifying a service-based, large-scale NGS system under IVDR

To begin with, FulgentExome is a service-based NGS solution that integrates wet-lab workflows with the Fulgent PLM bioinformatics pipeline. As a result, pursuing IVDR certification meant converting a mature CLIA/CAP testing service into a CE-marked IVD system with robust evidence across scientific validity, analytical performance, and clinical performance—for thousands of genes. In particular, key hurdles included: defining intended use at scale; validating third-party components; proving scientific validity across 4,600+ genes; above all fully validating the bioinformatics pipeline under medical device software standards.

MDx approach: a playbook for complex NGS + software

1) Build the right QMS, fast

First, we performed an IVDR GAP assessment. Next, we designed and implemented an ISO 13485-compliant QMS with risk management, supplier control, document control, internal audits, and management review—migrating from a CLIA/CAP model to IVDR-ready operations.

2) Engineer a defensible intended use

Meanwhile, the intended-use statement evolved iteratively—from an initial ~300-gene scope to whole-exome, finally landing on 4,600+ genes aligned to available clinical and analytical evidence. In the end, the final language was future-proofed to support rapid updates as evidence expands.

3) Split wet lab and software into two regulated products

Afterward, following round 1 review feedback, we separated the documentation into two Basic UDI-DIs—FulgentExome (wet lab) and Fulgent PLM (software)—to align with IVDR expectations for traceability and lifecycle control. Consequently, this restructuring sharpened conformity assessment and accelerated subsequent approvals.

4) Validate the informatics stack like a medical device

In parallel, we validated PLM under IEC 62304/82304, including architecture, version control, cybersecurity, verification/validation, and integration with external databases. Therefore, the result was a fully evidence-backed bioinformatics pipeline capable of reproducible, high-confidence variant calling and reporting.

5) Make “evidence at scale” practical

  • First, Scientific validity: Three-tier strategy combining validation of exome sequencing as an approach, reliance on curated public databases, and deep exemplars for a large subset of genes.
  • Second, Clinical performance: Leveraged routine testing experience (thousands of positives) to focus clinical evidence on high-prevalence genes, and instituted a robust PMPF strategy to continuously strengthen low-prevalence areas.

6) Orchestrate TÜV SÜD audits to success

  • Initially, Stage I confirmed documentation readiness, scope, Basic UDI-DIs and integration of IVDR processes into daily practice.
  • Subsequently, Stage II verified on-the-floor implementation of SOPs, training, competence, CAPA and change control—closing findings on short cycles to hit NB timelines.

Results that move the market

  • CE mark granted for FulgentExome & Fulgent PLM—among the first end-to-end Class C germline NGS solutions under IVDR.
  • Certified scope covers 4,600+ genes, positioning Fulgent as a reference lab for comprehensive hereditary disease testing serving European patients.
  • Post-certification, the platform scaled to >7,000 genes using a new probe set—demonstrating the inherent scalability built into the certified system (process, documentation, and change control).
  • Strengthened competitive standing in the EU diagnostics market; public communications highlight the magnitude of this achievement for large NGS panels.

Read more in the Fulgent press release and Citeline’s in-depth article.

What this means for labs and IVD developers planning large NGS submissions

If you operate an LDT today: you’ll need to translate CLIA/15189 practices into an ISO 13485 framework, document design controls, and produce a full PER (PEP/PER), APR, SVR, PMS/PMPF, SSP, and labeling/IFU aligned to GSPR. Expect to validate any bioinformatics pipeline as SaMD with IEC 62304/82304 and cybersecurity controls.

If your panel is “large”: you likely won’t have uniform clinical data across every gene. A structured tiered evidence model + PMPF can satisfy Notified Bodies while keeping your roadmap scalable.

If you combine wet lab + software: plan for separate Basic UDI-DIs and documentation sets. Treat the pipeline as a product with its own requirements, verification, and risk controls.

Why MDx

  • End-to-end IVDR expertise: From regulatory strategy & classification to Annex II/III technical files, PER/SVR/APR, training, and mock NB reviews.
  • Clinical performance studies: We design, run, and report ISO 20916 studies (protocols, eTMF, monitoring, biostats, PER alignment), and we can act as delegated sponsor for multi-country submissions—100% submission success rate to date.
  • Operational scale: ISO 9001 clinical QMS, EU/US partner network, multilingual CRAs, and a repeatable process honed on 60+ performance study submissions for top IVD and pharma clients.

Project timeline

Our joint project with Fulgent spanned July 2023–July 2025, with overlapping tracks for QMS creation, technical documentation, NB review, and Stage I/II audits—a coordinated plan that allowed rapid closure of findings and post-certification scaling.

Client perspective

The program demanded evening/weekend execution across regulatory, documentation, and project management to meet Notified Body timelines—effort that, in the client’s words, made all the difference in achieving what initially “seemed almost impossible.

Planning IVDR for your NGS panel? Here’s a quick readiness checklist

  • Intended use aligned to evidence (and future updates)
  • ISO 13485 QMS with software lifecycle integration
  • PER (PEP/PER), SVR, APR mapped to gene-level strategy
  • PLM/DR pipeline validated per IEC 62304/82304 (+cybersecurity)
  • Separate documentation/UDI for wet lab vs. software (if applicable)
  • PMS/PMPF plan to mature low-prevalence evidence post-market
  • Mock NB review + Stage I/II audit readiness

(Our team can lead or co-author each artifact above.)

Talk to us

Whether you’re certifying a focused oncology panel or pushing the limits with exome-scale content, MDx brings the cross-functional regulatory, clinical, quality, and software depth to make it possible—on a timeline that keeps your business competitive.

Written by:
Carlos Galamba

Carlos Galamba

CEO

Senior regulatory leader and former BSI IVDR reviewer with deep experience in CE marking high-risk IVDs, companion diagnostics, and IVDR implementation.
Industry Insights & Regulatory Updates

MDx CRO co-authors Journal of Liquid Biopsy paper on EU–US collaboration for IVDR-ready liquid biopsy validation

MDx CRO is proud to have contributed to the peer-reviewed article, “BLOODPAC’s collaborations with European Union liquid biopsy initiatives,” published in The Journal of Liquid Biopsy (Vol. 10, Article 100321; open access). The paper outlines practical pathways to align analytical validation, clinical performance evidence, and data standards that can accelerate European adoption of liquid biopsy under IVDR.

Carlos Galamba (CEO, MDx CRO) is listed among the authors, contributing European IVDR and clinical evidence expertise to this multi-stakeholder effort.

What the paper delivers (and why it matters)

  • Convergence on validation & evidence: It maps BLOODPAC’s US-developed minimum technical data elements and analytical validation protocols to EU needs—supporting more consistent clinical performance packages for IVDR submissions.
  • Data standards for reproducibility: The paper emphasizes fit-for-purpose standards and pre-competitive data sharing to improve comparability across clinical research for liquid biopsy, from cfDNA/ctDNA assay development to clinical use.
  • Practical EU–US collaboration: It proposes guidance and collaboration routes that can reduce variability across Member States and shorten time to patient access—without compromising IVDR rigor.

A broad coalition behind the work

The author affiliations span leading precision-medicine organizations and networks, including MDx CRO, Labcorp, Tempus AI, Natera, Exact Sciences, AstraZeneca, GSK, Bristol Myers Squibb, Johnson & Johnson, MSD, Thermo Fisher Scientific, TECAN, IQN Path, ELBS, EUCOPE, ISLB, Cancer Patients Europe, and BLOODPAC—a clear reflection of the field’s momentum toward shared, usable guidance.

MDx CRO’s contribution and perspective

Through our CEO, Carlos Galamba, MDx CRO contributed to this multi-stakeholder paper outlining practical EU–US collaboration to accelerate liquid biopsy adoption under IVDR. Our perspective aligns with the paper’s focus on:

  • IVDR-first evidence architecture that cleanly links intended use → analytical validation → clinical performance requirements for ctDNA/cfDNA assays.
  • Harmonized validation expectations by mapping BLOODPAC frameworks and data elements to EU evidence needs, supporting consistent submissions.
  • Clearer regulatory narratives that connect validation outcomes to performance claims and real-world clinical implementation.

“This contribution reflects MDx’s commitment to turning shared frameworks into credible, IVDR-ready evidence that speeds responsible patient access” – Carlos Galamba, CEO

For IVD developers: immediate takeaways

Think trans-Atlantic. Where appropriate, re-use US learnings and BLOODPAC frameworks to reduce duplication—while meeting EU requirements.

Design for IVDR from day zero. Lock pre-analytical variables and analytical validation plans that ladder to clinical performance claims.

Adopt shared data elements. Standardized data models future-proof submissions and enable cross-study comparisons for regulators and payers.

How we execute: turning frameworks into IVDR-ready evidence

1) Study architecture (IVDR-first)

We design from intended use → analytical validationclinical performance so claims, endpoints, and statistics line up from day one. For liquid biopsy (cfDNA/ctDNA), we predefine fit-for-purpose metrics (e.g., LoD/LoQ, precision, interference) and clinical endpoints (e.g., PPA/NPA, sensitivity/specificity).

2) Multisite execution (ISO 20916 aligned)

Feasibility and qualification of sites/labs, standardized pre-analytical controls (collection tubes, processing windows, storage), specimen logistics and chain-of-custody, risk-based monitoring, and documented deviation/CAPA management across centers.

3) Data you can trust (eCRF + eTMF)

We build validated eCRFs, enforce edit checks and audit trails, and maintain a complete eTMF/regulatory binder. Data dictionaries align with study objectives and, where appropriate, community data elements used in clinical research for liquid biopsy.

4) Analytical validation to clinical performance—without gaps

We run or coordinate liquid biopsy validation workstreams (method comparisons, reproducibility, cross-site concordance) and transition seamlessly into clinical performance studies so the evidence package is coherent under IVDR.

5) Reporting & regulatory narrative

IVDR-compliant documentation (Analytical Performance Report, Performance Evaluation Plan/Report, study reports), plus clear narratives that connect results to performance claims and labeling.

6) Governance & quality

Project governance with milestone dashboards, risk logs, vendor oversight, and audit-ready files under an ISO-driven clinical QMS.

Outcome: faster, cleaner submissions for IVDR liquid biopsy validation—and evidence that stands up to scrutiny.

Plan a study? Let’s map your assay’s intended use to the analytical validation and clinical performance evidence you’ll need.

Industry Insights & Regulatory Updates

COMBINE Programme: Streamlining EU Combined Studies for Medicines, Devices, and Diagnostics

Introduction to the COMBINE Programme

The European Union has taken a significant step towards streamlining combined studies involving medicinal products, medical devices, and in vitro diagnostics (IVDs) through the COMBINE Programme. Endorsed by national authorities across Member States, the programme aims to address long-standing challenges that hinder the efficiency of clinical trials and regulatory approvals under the Clinical Trials Regulation (CTR), Medical Device Regulation (MDR), and In Vitro Diagnostic Regulation (IVDR).

The Need for Streamlined Combined Studies

Combined studies, which investigate the use of multiple healthcare products—such as a medicinal product with a medical device or companion diagnostic—are essential for advancing patient care and supporting innovative treatments. However, the fragmented regulatory processes across the CTR, MDR, and IVDR create significant hurdles:

  • Administrative Complexity: Sponsors face parallel and often redundant assessment processes across Member States, leading to delays.
  • Ambiguities in Regulation: Overlapping requirements on reporting and classification of studies often result in confusion.
  • Harmonisation Gaps: Diverging approaches among national competent authorities slow down multi-country studies.

These challenges risk delaying the development and availability of critical healthcare solutions, impacting patients and stifling innovation.

The COMBINE Programme: A Collaborative EU Initiative

To overcome these challenges, the European Commission launched the COMBINE Programme, a cross-sector initiative designed to foster collaboration between regulatory authorities, ethics committees, and stakeholders. By unifying processes and addressing gaps at the interface of CTR, MDR, and IVDR, the COMBINE Programme sets out to:

  1. Simplify and harmonise the approval of combined studies across the EU.
  2. Improve collaboration between national competent authorities, the European Medicines Agency (EMA), ethics committees, and sponsors.
  3. Enhance Europe’s competitiveness in clinical research, aligning with the recommendations of the Draghi Report.

A Phased Approach to Change

The COMBINE Programme will be implemented over the coming years through seven cross-sector projects that focus on key areas such as piloting single assessment processes, harmonising serious adverse event (SAE) reporting, and enhancing advisory services for sponsors. The programme reflects a shared commitment to supporting innovation while ensuring patient safety and regulatory efficiency across the EU.

The Seven Cross-Sector Projects of the COMBINE Programme

The COMBINE Programme will be implemented through seven cross-sector projects, each addressing specific challenges in the regulatory landscape of combined studies. These projects represent a collaborative effort between national competent authorities, ethics committees, the European Medicines Agency (EMA), and other stakeholders to streamline processes, harmonise reporting, and improve advisory services for sponsors.

1. Piloting a Single Assessment Process for Multi-Country Combined Studies

  • Objective: Introduce a coordinated, unified assessment process for combined studies involving medicinal products, medical devices, and in vitro diagnostics across multiple EU Member States.
  • Why It Matters: Current processes require separate national submissions under different frameworks (CTR, MDR, and IVDR). This pilot project aims to reduce duplication, align timelines, and ensure a single, streamlined review process.
  • Outcome: A harmonised approach that accelerates study approvals, reduces administrative burden, and improves efficiency for sponsors conducting multinational combined studies.

2. Harmonisation of Serious Adverse Event (SAE) Reporting Processes

  • Objective: Align the reporting requirements for Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) across the CTR, MDR, and IVDR frameworks.
  • Challenges Addressed: SAEs are reported differently under each regulation, creating confusion and inefficiencies for sponsors and regulators. Lack of harmonised processes delays decision-making and impacts patient safety monitoring.
  • Outcome: A unified, consistent SAE reporting process that improves clarity, facilitates timely reporting, and ensures compliance across sectors.

3. Clarifying the Interface Between Clinical Trials and Medical Device Regulations

  • Objective: Resolve regulatory ambiguities where the Clinical Trials Regulation (CTR) intersects with the Medical Device Regulation (MDR) and IVD Regulation (IVDR).
  • Key Questions Addressed: When does a study require a Clinical Trial (CT), a Clinical Investigation (CI), or a Performance Study (PS)? How should combined studies be classified and approved under multiple regulatory frameworks?
  • Outcome: Clear, harmonised guidelines for sponsors and regulators to navigate the interface between these regulations, ensuring smoother approvals and regulatory compliance.

4. Enhancing Advisory Services for Sponsors

  • Objective: Explore new opportunities for providing coordinated, cross-sector advice to sponsors conducting combined studies.
  • Why It Matters: Sponsors often face uncertainty when designing combined studies due to fragmented regulatory advice. A lack of centralized guidance increases the risk of regulatory non-compliance and delays.
  • Outcome: Improved advisory mechanisms, such as coordinated pre-submission meetings, that help sponsors navigate regulatory complexities, streamline submissions, and accelerate study timelines.

5. Facilitating Knowledge Exchange Between National Authorities

  • Objective: Promote collaboration and knowledge sharing among national competent authorities, ethics committees, and regulatory bodies.
  • Key Actions: Establish platforms for cross-sector dialogue and exchange of best practices. Encourage joint discussions on shared challenges, such as study assessments, adverse event reporting, and ethical considerations.
  • Outcome: A stronger, more unified regulatory network capable of addressing challenges efficiently and supporting the successful implementation of combined studies across the EU.

6. Aligning Regulatory Timelines and Approval Processes

  • Objective: Harmonise the timelines and approval procedures for combined studies under the CTR, MDR, and IVDR frameworks.
  • Challenges Addressed: Variations in national processes and timelines result in delays, particularly for multi-country studies. Sponsors face inconsistent requirements, creating additional administrative burden.
  • Outcome: A coordinated approach that aligns national approval processes, ensures predictable timelines, and fosters greater consistency across Member States.

7. Strengthening Stakeholder Engagement for the COMBINE Programme

  • Objective: Foster open dialogue and collaboration with key stakeholders, including sponsors, clinicians, patient representatives, and ethics committees.
  • Why It’s Important: Involving stakeholders ensures that the solutions developed under the COMBINE Programme are practical, efficient, and patient-centric. Enhanced engagement helps address real-world challenges faced by industry and clinicians in conducting combined studies.
  • Outcome: Improved stakeholder collaboration that ensures the programme’s goals align with industry needs, supports innovation, and prioritises patient outcomes.

Driving Regulatory Innovation Through the COMBINE Programme

The seven cross-sector projects under the COMBINE Programme address the core challenges of combined studies by streamlining processes, clarifying regulatory requirements, and fostering collaboration across the EU. These efforts are essential for improving efficiency, reducing delays, and enabling the development of innovative treatments that combine medicines, medical devices, and diagnostics.

Why the COMBINE Programme Matters

The COMBINE Programme represents a pivotal step toward addressing the regulatory inefficiencies that have long challenged combined studies involving medicinal products, medical devices, and diagnostics. By introducing streamlined processes, harmonising reporting requirements, and fostering collaboration, the programme delivers tangible benefits for all stakeholders.

For Sponsors and Manufacturers: Streamlined Approval Processes

  • Simplified Submissions: The COMBINE Programme eliminates duplication by piloting a single assessment process for multi-country combined studies.
  • Reduced Administrative Burden: Sponsors will no longer have to navigate fragmented processes under the CTR, MDR, and IVDR, reducing time spent on regulatory paperwork.
  • Faster Approvals: Harmonised timelines and improved coordination across Member States will accelerate approvals for combined studies, enabling quicker market entry for innovative products.

For a sponsor conducting a clinical trial of a medicinal product alongside a performance study of an IVD, the single assessment process reduces redundant national submissions, ensuring a smoother and faster pathway to approval.

For National Competent Authorities and Ethics Committees: Improved Collaboration and Efficiency

  • Unified Approach: The programme fosters collaboration between national authorities, ethics committees, and the EMA, ensuring consistency in study evaluations.
  • Knowledge Sharing: By facilitating the exchange of best practices, authorities can address common challenges, such as adverse event reporting and interface ambiguities, more effectively.
  • Efficient Use of Resources: Coordinated assessment processes streamline workflows, reducing the strain on regulatory bodies and ensuring a more efficient allocation of resources.

For Patients: Faster Access to Innovative Treatments

  • Accelerated Innovation: By simplifying regulatory pathways, the COMBINE Programme ensures that groundbreaking treatments—such as combined therapies and diagnostics—reach patients more quickly.
  • Improved Safety: Harmonised serious adverse event (SAE) reporting enhances patient safety by ensuring timely and consistent monitoring across all regulatory sectors.
  • Personalised Medicine: Combined studies enable the development of advanced solutions, such as companion diagnostics paired with targeted therapies, leading to more tailored and effective treatment options.

In diseases like cancer, where combined studies often involve companion diagnostics and therapies, delays in approval can mean a delay in access to life-saving treatments. The COMBINE Programme aims to eliminate these delays, prioritising patient needs.

For the EU: Enhancing Global Competitiveness

  • Addressing Recommendations from the Draghi Report: The Draghi Report underscored the importance of regulatory efficiency in maintaining the EU’s leadership in clinical research and innovation. The COMBINE Programme aligns directly with these goals, strengthening Europe’s position as a global hub for clinical trials.
  • Attracting Global Studies: A streamlined, harmonised approach makes the EU more attractive for multinational combined studies, encouraging sponsors to invest in research within Europe.
  • Supporting Innovation Ecosystems: By addressing regulatory hurdles, the programme fosters an environment conducive to innovation, benefiting SMEs, manufacturers, and healthcare systems.

The COMBINE Programme positions Europe as a leader in integrated clinical research, ensuring the EU remains competitive in the rapidly evolving MedTech and pharmaceutical industries.

Driving Real-World Impact Across Sectors

By addressing the challenges of combined studies, the COMBINE Programme delivers a balanced solution that benefits all stakeholders. For sponsors, it reduces complexity and accelerates approvals. For regulators, it ensures efficiency and collaboration. Most importantly, for patients, it enables faster access to innovative treatments that improve healthcare outcomes.

The COMBINE Programme and EU Competitiveness

The COMBINE Programme is not only a solution to regulatory complexity but also a cornerstone of the EU’s broader strategy to maintain global competitiveness in clinical research and medical innovation. By streamlining processes and fostering collaboration, the programme positions Europe as a leading region for conducting combined studies that integrate medicinal products, medical devices, and diagnostics.

Addressing the Recommendations of the Draghi Report

The Draghi Report, which outlines key priorities for strengthening Europe’s economic and technological competitiveness, highlights the importance of a streamlined regulatory environment for innovation in clinical research. The COMBINE Programme directly supports these recommendations by:

  • Reducing Regulatory Complexity: Simplifying combined studies ensures a faster path from research to patient access, allowing Europe to stay ahead of global competition.
  • Promoting Innovation: A harmonised and efficient system encourages sponsors and manufacturers to invest in research and development within the EU.
  • Improving Market Access: By removing administrative barriers, new treatments can reach the market sooner, boosting Europe’s role as a leader in health innovation.

Strengthening the EU as a Global Hub for Clinical Research

1. Attracting Multinational Studies

Global sponsors often face challenges when navigating fragmented regulatory systems in the EU. The COMBINE Programme resolves these issues by:

  • Offering single, coordinated assessments for multi-country studies.
  • Harmonising timelines and reporting requirements under the CTR, MDR, and IVDR frameworks.

This streamlined approach makes the EU a more attractive destination for conducting global clinical studies, ensuring sponsors can leverage Europe’s vast expertise, resources, and patient access.

2. Fostering Cross-Sector Innovation

The growing trend of personalised medicine relies on combining medicinal products with diagnostic devices. The COMBINE Programme removes regulatory hurdles that delay the integration of:

  • Companion diagnostics: Ensuring that innovative treatments are paired with advanced diagnostics for targeted patient care.
  • Advanced therapies: Supporting innovative combined treatments for diseases such as cancer, cardiovascular conditions, and rare diseases.

By addressing these challenges, the EU fosters a dynamic environment where innovation can thrive across sectors, benefiting both industry and patients.

3. Supporting Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs)

The COMBINE Programme simplifies regulatory pathways, which is particularly critical for SMEs in the MedTech and pharmaceutical sectors. These companies often face resource constraints when navigating complex regulations. By providing:

  • Clear guidance on the interface between CTR, MDR, and IVDR.
  • Access to advisory services for combined studies.
  • Predictable timelines through harmonised processes.

The programme ensures SMEs can bring innovative products to market faster, strengthening Europe’s innovation ecosystem.

Delivering Economic and Healthcare Benefits

The successful implementation of the COMBINE Programme will not only drive regulatory efficiency but also deliver far-reaching benefits across Europe:

Economic Growth:

  • Attracting more clinical trials and combined studies generates investments in research and development, boosting the EU economy.
  • Improved innovation pathways strengthen the global competitiveness of EU-based manufacturers and sponsors

Healthcare Advancements:

  • Patients benefit from accelerated access to cutting-edge treatments that combine medicinal products, medical devices, and diagnostics.
  • A harmonised system ensures safer, more effective healthcare solutions reach the market efficiently.

For a European SME developing an innovative therapy paired with a diagnostic IVD, the streamlined approval process reduces delays, allowing faster market entry and broader patient access.

The EU’s Vision for Clinical Research Leadership

Through the COMBINE Programme, the European Union reaffirms its commitment to fostering innovation, supporting collaboration, and maintaining its position as a global leader in clinical research. By addressing regulatory inefficiencies and harmonising processes, the programme ensures that Europe remains an attractive hub for sponsors, manufacturers, and researchers driving the next generation of medical advancements.

Key Takeaway

The COMBINE Programme is a critical initiative that strengthens Europe’s competitive edge in clinical research. By simplifying pathways for combined studies, fostering innovation, and aligning with strategic goals outlined in the Draghi Report, the programme sets the stage for economic growth, global leadership, and improved patient outcomes across the EU.

Implementation and Next Steps for the COMBINE Programme

The successful roll-out of the COMBINE Programme requires a structured, phased approach to ensure that its ambitious goals are achieved efficiently and effectively. By leveraging cross-sector collaboration, pilot projects, and continuous evaluation, the programme sets the stage for lasting regulatory improvements across the EU.

COMBINE Programme Phased Rollout

The COMBINE Programme will be implemented in three key stages over the coming years:

1. Stage 1: Pilot and Early Initiatives (2024–2025)

Key Focus:

  • Launch the pilot for a single assessment process for combined studies involving medicinal products and medical devices across multiple Member States.
  • Initiate harmonisation efforts for Serious Adverse Event (SAE) reporting, streamlining processes under the CTR, MDR, and IVDR

Actions:

  • Identify candidate combined studies for the single assessment pilot.
  • Establish cross-functional task forces to develop and test harmonised SAE reporting frameworks.

Outcome: Early learnings from pilot initiatives will inform best practices and provide actionable insights for scaling solutions across the EU.

2. Stage 2: Scaling and Integration (2025–2026)

Key Focus:

  • Expand successful pilot initiatives, integrating the single assessment process into broader multi-country studies.
  • Strengthen cross-sector collaboration by enhancing knowledge exchange between national authorities and ethics committees.

Actions:

  • Roll out the harmonised assessment framework to additional Member States.
  • Launch training programmes to support national authorities, ethics committees, and sponsors in implementing new processes.
  • Develop and publish clear interface guidance to resolve ambiguities between CTR, MDR, and IVDR.

Outcome: A more unified and harmonised approach to combined studies across Member States, improving regulatory efficiency and reducing delays.

3. Stage 3: Full Implementation and Evaluation (2026–2027)

Key Focus:

  • Achieve full implementation of the programme’s objectives, ensuring long-term sustainability and continuous improvement.
  • Monitor progress and evaluate the impact of the COMBINE Programme on EU clinical research and innovation.

Actions:

  • Conduct comprehensive evaluations of the programme’s milestones, assessing its success in streamlining combined studies and supporting stakeholders.
  • Strengthen engagement with sponsors, clinicians, and patient representatives to identify opportunities for further refinement.
  • Publish progress reports to share achievements, challenges, and next steps.

Outcome: A fully harmonised regulatory framework that makes the EU a global leader in supporting combined studies of medicinal products, medical devices, and diagnostics.

Key Stakeholders Driving Implementation

The successful implementation of the COMBINE Programme depends on collaboration among a wide range of stakeholders, including:

  • National Competent Authorities (NCAs): Leading the development and execution of pilot initiatives and harmonised frameworks at the Member State level.
  • European Medicines Agency (EMA): Providing regulatory expertise, scientific consultation, and coordination for multi-country studies.
  • Ethics Committees: Aligning ethical review processes with the programme’s streamlined assessment objectives.
  • Sponsors and Manufacturers: Engaging in pilot studies, providing feedback, and adopting new processes to improve study timelines and regulatory compliance.
  • Clinicians and Patient Representatives: Contributing real-world perspectives to ensure that the programme prioritises patient safety and healthcare innovation.

Monitoring Progress and Ensuring Accountability

To ensure the COMBINE Programme delivers its objectives, robust monitoring and evaluation mechanisms will be implemented:

  • Regular Progress Reports: Published at key milestones to assess the programme’s impact, identify challenges, and showcase achievements.
  • Feedback Loops: Stakeholder input, including sponsors, NCAs, and ethics committees, will be collected to refine processes and address emerging issues.
  • Performance Metrics: Defined to measure success, including:
    • Reduction in approval timelines for multi-country combined studies.
    • Increased consistency in serious adverse event reporting.
    • Improved clarity on the interface between clinical trials and medical device regulations.

Building a Sustainable Future for Combined Studies

The COMBINE Programme is not just a short-term solution but a long-term framework for driving innovation and efficiency in EU clinical research. By fostering collaboration, aligning processes, and prioritising continuous improvement, the programme ensures that Europe remains at the forefront of healthcare innovation.

What’s Next for Stakeholders?

As the COMBINE Programme progresses, stakeholders can expect:

  1. Opportunities to Participate in Pilots: Sponsors and manufacturers are encouraged to engage with pilot projects for the single assessment process.
  2. Clearer Guidance: Publication of harmonised frameworks and interface clarifications to reduce regulatory ambiguity.
  3. Improved Communication: Enhanced dialogue between regulators, sponsors, ethics committees, and patient representatives.

By working together, all stakeholders can contribute to the success of the COMBINE Programme, ensuring it delivers its vision of a harmonised, streamlined regulatory environment for combined studies.

Key Takeaway: The phased implementation of the COMBINE Programme marks a transformative shift in the EU’s approach to combined studies. Through pilots, collaboration, and continuous evaluation, the programme sets the foundation for faster, more efficient approvals that benefit sponsors, regulators, and—most importantly—patients.

Conclusion: A Unified Vision for Combined Studies

The COMBINE Programme marks a pivotal step in the European Union’s commitment to creating a harmonised, efficient, and collaborative regulatory framework for combined studies. By addressing long-standing challenges at the intersection of the Clinical Trials Regulation (CTR), Medical Device Regulation (MDR), and In Vitro Diagnostic Regulation (IVDR), the programme sets a clear path toward innovation, competitiveness, and improved patient care.

Transforming Regulatory Efficiency

Through its seven cross-sector projects, the COMBINE Programme delivers concrete solutions to streamline combined studies:

  • Simplifying approvals with a single assessment process for multi-country studies.
  • Aligning serious adverse event (SAE) reporting across sectors to ensure safety and consistency.
  • Clarifying regulatory interfaces to resolve ambiguities between clinical trials and device regulations.
  • Fostering collaboration among national competent authorities, ethics committees, and stakeholders to promote knowledge exchange and efficiency.

These efforts reduce administrative burdens, harmonise timelines, and improve access to clear, actionable regulatory guidance.

COMBINE Programme Supporting Innovation and Competitiveness

By eliminating regulatory fragmentation and ensuring consistent, coordinated processes, the COMBINE Programme positions the EU as a global leader in clinical research and medical innovation.

  • Sponsors and manufacturers benefit from faster approvals and streamlined pathways, enabling them to bring innovative treatments to market more efficiently.
  • Patients gain quicker access to integrated healthcare solutions, including advanced therapies, medical devices, and companion diagnostics.
  • National authorities and ethics committees operate within a more efficient, harmonised framework, reducing duplication and ensuring safety.

In alignment with the Draghi Report recommendations, the COMBINE Programme strengthens Europe’s competitive edge, attracting global investment and driving economic growth in the MedTech and pharmaceutical sectors.

Looking Ahead: A Future of Innovation and Collaboration

The COMBINE Programme is more than a regulatory initiative; it is a transformative vision for the future of clinical research in the EU. By fostering collaboration, harmonising processes, and streamlining combined studies, the programme paves the way for a new era of healthcare innovation.

As Europe continues to lead the charge in medical and clinical advancements, the COMBINE Programme will play a critical role in ensuring that innovative treatments reach patients faster, safer, and more effectively.

Key Takeaway: The COMBINE Programme unifies the efforts of regulators, stakeholders, and innovators to streamline combined studies, strengthen Europe’s leadership in clinical research, and deliver groundbreaking healthcare solutions to patients across the EU.

Call to Action for the COMBINE Programme

Are you planning or conducting a combined study involving medicines, medical devices, or diagnostics? The MDx team is here to help you navigate the complexities of the COMBINE framework. Contact us today to streamline your regulatory strategy and ensure the success of your combined study.

Get in touch with the MDx team now to accelerate innovation and bring your study to life!

Industry Insights & Regulatory Updates 2

EU Reference Laboratories under IVDR: What Class D Manufacturers Must Know

In this article, we look at how the In Vitro Diagnostic Regulation (IVDR) (EU) 2017/746 reshapes oversight for the highest‑risk IVDs. One of its most important elements is the creation of European Union Reference Laboratories (EURLs). These laboratories play a central role in ensuring the safety and performance of Class D devices. Article 100 defines their mission, and the Commission has since issued detailed implementing rules that explain how EURLs must be organised, resourced, and supervised.

For manufacturers, particularly those developing Class D assays, these requirements matter. EURLs can influence performance verification, batch testing, and overall timelines. Understanding when their involvement is triggered, and what they actually do, is essential for planning a realistic and compliant development pathway.

The Legal Backbone of EU Reference Laboratories IVDR

EU Reference Laboratories (EURLs) are a central element of the IVDR oversight framework. Article 100 IVDR establishes their mandate, defining their tasks and the criteria they must meet. These rules form the legal foundation for how the EU evaluates the highest‑risk IVDs.

Two implementing regulations complete this framework. Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/944 sets out the detailed requirements EURLs must fulfil—covering personnel competence, equipment and reference materials, quality management systems, organisational structure, confidentiality, impartiality, outsourcing controls, accreditation, and ongoing compliance verification. A second act, Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2713, designates the first EURLs and confirms the date from which they apply: 1 October 2024.

What EU Reference Laboratories Check for Class D Devices

Under the IVDR, certain Class D devices require EURL involvement. For these devices, EURLs independently verify performance claims and conduct batch testing as part of the conformity assessment. This adds an additional scientific check (beyond the notified body review) to confirm analytical performance and support lot release where required.

For manufacturers, this means planning ahead. Performance panels, reference materials, sample availability, and timelines must align with EURL capacity and testing requirements.

Key Requirements Defined for EU Reference Laboratories

The 2022/944 implementing act translates Article 100(4) into concrete operational obligations. To be designated, EURLs must demonstrate:

  • Competent and independent personnel
  • Fit‑for‑purpose equipment, specimens, control and reference materials
  • Compliance with relevant international standards and best laboratory practices
  • Robust organisational and administrative structures
  • Confidentiality and data‑protection safeguards
  • Clear independence and conflict‑of‑interest controls
  • Strict oversight of any outsourced activities
  • Appropriate accreditation
  • Continuous verification of compliance, including Commission audits and the possibility of suspension if requirements are not met

These criteria ensure that EURLs maintain scientific integrity and high analytical standards.

Timeline and Transition for EURL Involvement

With the publication of Implementing Regulation 2023/2713, designated EURLs become operational from 1 October 2024. From that date, any new conformity assessment application falling within an EURL’s scope is expected to route performance verification or batch testing through the designated laboratory.

Devices already under assessment or already certified before this date may follow specific transition arrangements. Manufacturers should consult their notified body to understand case‑by‑case implications.

Practical Steps for Manufacturers

To prepare for EURL involvement under the IVDR:

  • Align performance evaluation plans early with potential EURL panel requirements (e.g., specimen types, reference materials, pathogen/biomarker variability).
  • Check whether your device falls within an EURL designation scope and adjust submission timelines accordingly.
  • Engage your notified body to understand dossier routing, documentation expectations, and language requirements.
  • Monitor NB and authority communications, which often provide clear summaries as EURLs scale up their activities.

Early alignment helps manufacturers avoid delays and navigate this additional scientific review step efficiently.

Industry Insights & Regulatory Updates

FDA Laboratory Developed Tests (LDTs) Regulation

The FDA Laboratory Developed Tests regulation marks one of the most significant shifts in U.S. diagnostic oversight in decades. The FDA’s new rule phases in full regulation of LDTs over four years, with no grandfathering. This change elevates the importance of IVD CROs, whose regulatory and clinical expertise will be critical as laboratories adapt to stringent new requirements. The rule represents a major transformation in the U.S. IVD landscape and will reshape how laboratories develop, validate, and maintain LDTs.

Introduction

On September 29, 2023, the FDA released a groundbreaking proposed rule that fundamentally redefines how the agency regulates Laboratory‑Developed Tests (LDTs). This proposal shifts LDTs out of decades of enforcement discretion and brings them fully under the FDA’s medical device framework.

Because LDTs are a subset of in vitro diagnostic products (IVDs), the new rule has sweeping implications for clinical laboratories, manufacturers, and the broader diagnostics industry. Under the FDA Laboratory Developed Tests regulation, LDTs will now be treated like other medical devices—requiring quality systems, medical device reporting, registration, listing, and in many cases, premarket review.

For stakeholders across the IVD sector, this change is significant.

Key Points to Consider as the FDA regulates LDTs

  1. Expanded Definition of IVDs
    The FDA proposes to explicitly classify LDTs as IVDs under 21 CFR 809.3.
    This means LDTs will now fall under the same requirements as traditional IVD medical devices.
  2. Phased, Four‑Year Implementation
    The FDA will remove enforcement discretion in five stages over a four‑year timeline.
    Each stage introduces new regulatory obligations for laboratories.
  3. No Grandfather Clause
    The proposal does not exempt existing LDTs. All LDTs (old and new) must eventually comply.
  4. Test Categories Exempt from Enhanced Oversight
    Certain test types, including forensic tests and HLA assays, are proposed for exemption.
  5. Public Comment Period
    Stakeholders were invited to submit comments through December 4, 2023.

Background on FDA Regulation for LDTs and IVDs

IVDs have traditionally been subject to rigorous regulatory scrutiny under various heads:

  • 510(k) premarket notification or premarket approval (PMA)
  • Quality system regulation
  • Medical device reporting
  • Registration and listing
  • Labeling

LDTs, however, historically operated under enforcement discretion, receiving minimal oversight. This approach was based on the assumption that LDTs were low risk and used primarily within single laboratories.

That landscape has changed.

The Evolving Landscape of LDTs

Over the last 50 years, LDTs have become increasingly complex, widely used, and technically sophisticated. This evolution has driven demand for stronger oversight in areas such as:

  • Clinical validity
  • Analytical performance
  • Manufacturing consistency
  • Patient safety

The new FDA Laboratory Developed Tests regulation directly responds to these gaps. By redefining LDTs and removing enforcement discretion, the FDA aims to strengthen public health protections.

The Road Ahead: Key Regulatory Impacts

The phased implementation timeline will introduce major compliance requirements:

Medical Device Reporting

The first enforcement area to take effect.

Quality Systems Regulation

Expected three years after publication of the final rule.

Premarket Review

Introduced 3.5 to four years after the final rule, starting with high‑risk LDTs and expanding to moderate-and-low risk tests.

Labs performing LDTs must begin planning now. Clinical and analytical validation, documentation systems, and regulatory processes will all require upgrades.

Alignment With Europe’s IVDR Rollout

The FDA’s new approach mirrors developments in Europe under the In Vitro Diagnostic Regulation (IVDR). The IVDR already applies strict rules to in‑house tests and LDTs, requiring:

  • Complete Technical Documentation
  • A compliant Quality Management System
  • Performance evaluation and validation
  • Adherence to Article 5.5 requirements for in‑house devices

çUnder IVDR, an LDT cannot be used if an equivalent CE‑marked test exists. This forces laboratories to justify in‑house development and meet near‑manufacturer‑level standards.

Conclusion: An Industry in Transition

As experts in IVD quality, regulatory, and clinical operations, MDx CRO encourages laboratories and manufacturers to prepare now for the FDA Laboratory Developed Tests regulation. Although legal challenges may influence the timeline, increased oversight is inevitable, and already fully established within Europe under the IVDR.

Stakeholders should submit comments to the FDA by December 4, 2023, and begin strengthening their regulatory systems immediately.

Written by:
Carlos Galamba

Carlos Galamba

CEO

Senior regulatory leader and former BSI IVDR reviewer with deep experience in CE marking high-risk IVDs, companion diagnostics, and IVDR implementation.
Industry Insights & Regulatory Updates