FDA Draft Guidance on Sex-Specific and Gender-Specific Data

Understanding FDA Draft Guidance and Industry Best Practices

In the regulatory landscape, it is crucial to understand what a draft guidance document is, how it differs from regulations, and how industry stakeholders should approach it. Recent discussions have highlighted misinformation surrounding FDA draft guidance documents, potentially leading to rushed decisions based on incomplete or misunderstood information.

What is an FDA Draft Guidance?

A draft guidance document represents the FDA’s current thinking on a specific topic but is not legally binding. It is meant to provide clarity to industry stakeholders about the agency’s expectations while allowing for public input. A draft guidance is not a regulation, meaning compliance is not mandatory. However, following guidance documents is often considered best practice for regulatory compliance.

The Comment Period and Public Feedback

When the FDA issues a draft guidance, it allows for a public comment period. During this time, industry experts, companies, and other stakeholders can submit feedback, ask for clarifications, or suggest changes. This period ensures that all perspectives are considered before finalizing the document.

Current Situation: FDA Guidance on Sex-Specific and Gender-Specific Data

A particular case in point is the FDA draft guidance titled "Evaluation of Sex-Specific and Gender-Specific Data in Medical Device Clinical Studies." While it was initially published, attempts to access the document via the FDA website now result in a ‘Page Not Found’ error: FDA Draft Guidance Link

This removal has led to speculation, with some LinkedIn users generating engagement by suggesting that stakeholders should act urgently. However, the reality is that we do not currently know the FDA’s exact reasoning behind the document’s disappearance. The FDA is under a mandatory quiet period until February 1, preventing them from providing public statements on the matter.

Best Practices in the Absence of the Draft Guidance

While the draft guidance is unavailable on the FDA website, the content remains accessible through archive tools such as the Wayback Machine, and I can provide a copy to those interested. More importantly, the principles outlined in the draft guidance align with EU market regulations, making them valuable for organizations aiming for global compliance.

Alignment with International Standards and Regulations

Nothing in the guidance was especially groundbreaking. Below, I have provided an analysis of the key concepts across EU regulations and international standards and what the FDA has proposed.

Topic	FDA Recommendation	Regulation	Regulation Text	Analysis
Inclusion of Sex/Gender-Specific Data	Encourages inclusion of diverse populations and requires justification if sex- or gender-specific data is not collected.	MDR 2017/745, Annex I, Chapter I, Section 1	"Devices must achieve the performance intended by the manufacturer and be designed and manufactured in such a way that, during normal conditions of use, they are suitable for their intended purpose."	Devices should be safe and effective for all intended user groups, necessitating consideration of sex and gender differences in their design, testing, and validation processes.
Clinical Evaluation	Recommends evaluating and reporting clinical data by sex and gender to ensure adequate representation.	MDR 2017/745, Annex XIV, Part A, Section 1	"Manufacturers are required to plan, conduct, and document a clinical evaluation, including a critical evaluation of relevant scientific literature and an assessment of clinical data."	Clinical evaluation must account for demographic factors, including sex and gender, to ensure comprehensive assessment and avoid unintended performance discrepancies in different patient populations.
Post-Market Surveillance Considerations	Recommends manufacturers conduct post-market analysis to identify any sex- or gender-based disparities in safety and effectiveness.	MDR 2017/745, Article 83	"Manufacturers shall plan, establish, document, implement, maintain, and update a post-market surveillance system that is proportionate to the risk class and appropriate for the device."	Manufacturers must collect and analyze sex- and gender-specific data to identify and address disparities in device performance or adverse events among different user groups.
Ethical Principles for Diversity in Trials	Stresses the importance of ensuring clinical study enrollment includes an appropriate demographic distribution.	Declaration of Helsinki, Paragraph 13	"Groups that are underrepresented in medical research should be provided appropriate access to participation in research."	Mandates equitable access to research participation, ensuring that clinical studies reflect the diversity of real-world patient populations.
Clinical Investigations and Ethical Considerations	Encourages sponsors to follow ethical principles aligning with international standards.	ISO 14155:2020, Section 4	"Clinical investigations shall be conducted in accordance with the ethical principles that have their origin in the Declaration of Helsinki."	Ensures that ethical considerations, including diversity and inclusion, guide clinical trials to make them representative of the populations they will serve.
Informed Consent and Diverse Participant Inclusion	Recommends ensuring patients are fully informed about the study and its implications, particularly for sex- and gender-based considerations.	ISO 14155:2020, Section 5.8.4	"Investigators shall ensure that subjects are adequately informed about the nature, objectives, benefits, and potential risks of the clinical investigation."	Supports the ethical inclusion of diverse populations by ensuring informed decision-making, particularly for underrepresented groups, thereby improving trial representation.
Data Analysis by Sex and Gender	Encourages stratified analysis of clinical data by sex and gender to identify potential differences in device safety and efficacy.	ISO 14155:2020, Clause 6.3	"The clinical investigation shall be designed to evaluate whether the investigational device is suitable for the purpose(s) and the population(s) for which it is intended."	Ensures study design includes demographic variability, reducing the risk of biased clinical results that could lead to inadequate device performance across different user groups.
Justification for Single-Sex Studies	Requires manufacturers to provide a scientific rationale if sex- or gender-specific data is not collected.	ISO 14155:2020, Section A.1.5	"The sponsor shall justify the inclusion and exclusion criteria used to define the study population."	Requires sponsors to provide scientific reasoning if a study excludes certain demographics, such as a single-sex study, ensuring that data gaps do not lead to poor device performance in excluded populations.
Post-Market Surveillance and Quality Management	Recommends using real-world evidence to assess whether sex- or gender-based differences emerge after the device is marketed.	ISO 13485:2016, Clause 8.2.1	"Manufacturers shall establish a feedback system to gather data from post-market use, including performance across different patient demographics."	Ensures quality management processes consider demographic differences, allowing for the identification of sex- and gender-based safety or efficacy concerns in post-market data.

Why Diversity in Clinical Research is Crucial

Beyond regulatory compliance, designing medical devices and treatments for a diverse population is the right thing to do—both ethically and from a business perspective. Neglecting to consider diversity in clinical research can result in devices that are ineffective or, worse, unsafe for large portions of the population.

Key Takeaways for Industry Stakeholders

The removal of the draft guidance from the FDA website does not necessarily indicate policy changes as we don't yet know why it's gone.
The FDA cannot provide statements until after February 1, making speculation unhelpful.
Following the draft guidance remains best practice, particularly given its alignment with EU MDR and international standards.
Documents such as this draft guidance do not carry the force of law but reflect FDA’s expectations for industry best practices.
Prioritizing diversity in clinical research improves safety, effectiveness, and market reach.

For those who would like access to the archived draft guidance, feel free to reach out, and I can provide a copy. Meanwhile, regulatory decisions should be made based on verified sources rather than speculation designed to generate engagement on social media. If you're looking for measured, methodical guidance in navigating the shifting regulatory landscape—without the noise and reactive nonsense—let’s connect. Follow me for clear, practical insights, or reach out for quality and regulatory support that keeps you ahead of changes without the panic.