Posted on

What Are EU Reference Labs for IVDs?

EU Reference Labs for IVD’s – explained

In vitro diagnostic medical devices (IVDs) play a vital role in providing essential information for the diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment of diseases.  IVDs must comply with the In Vitro Diagnostic Medical Device Regulation (IVDR – Regulation (EU) 2017/746) to be placed on the European Union (EU) market.

The IVDR introduced the concept of EU Reference Laboratories (EURLs) for IVDs. EURLs are specialised laboratories designated by the European Commission, to provide scientific and technical expertise for specific types of high-risk IVDs. The designation and responsibilities of EURLs are outlined in Article 100 of the IVDR and more details are laid out in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/944.

Designation & Responsibilities of EURLs

For a laboratory to be designated as an EURL by the European Commission, it must:

  • Demonstrate appropriate expertise and experience in the relevant field
  • Have adequate staff with appropriate qualifications
  • Possess necessary equipment and reference materials
  • Show impartiality and independence from commercial interests
  • Comply with ISO/IEC 17025 and other relevant standards
  • Have appropriate quality management systems in place

Once designated, EURLs’ tasks include the following:

  • Performance Verification – EURLs verify the performance claims of class D IVDs by conducting laboratory tests on samples provided by manufacturers i.e., EURLs carry out tests on each manufactured batch of devices.
  • Common Specifications Development – EURLs contribute to the development of common specifications and technical guidance for specific types of devices.
  • Technical Assistance – EURLs provide scientific advice and technical assistance to national authorities, notified bodies and manufacturers.
  • Reference Materials Management – EURLs establish, manage, and make available reference materials and methods for high-risk IVDs.
  • Coordination Role – EURLs coordinate a network of national reference laboratories to harmonize testing methodologies and practices across the EU.
  • Research and Innovation – EURLs contribute to research and innovation in their specific areas of expertise.

Types of IVDs Subject to EURL Assessment

The EURLs verify the performance claims and carry out batch testing on high-risk (Class D) IVDs:

  • Devices which detect the presence of / exposure to, a transmissible agent in blood / blood components / cells tissues / organs / any of their derivatives, to assess their suitability for transfusion / transplantation / cell administration.
  • Devices which detect the presence of / exposure to, a transmissible agent that causes a life-threatening disease with high propagation risk.
  • Devices which determine the infectious load of a life-threatening disease, where monitoring is critical in the process of patient management.
  • Devices for blood grouping, which determine any of the following markers:
    • ABO system [A (ABO1), B (ABO2), AB (ABO3)]
    • Rhesus system [RH1 (D), RHW1, RH2 (C), RH3 (E), RH4 (c), RH5 (e)]
    • Kell system [KEL1 (K)]
    • Kidd system [JK1 (Jka), JK2 (Jkb)]
    • Duffy system [FY1 (Fya), FY2 (Fyb)]

Impact on the Industry

EURLs for IVDs have an impact on both IVD manufacturers and notified bodies.

Manufacturers of class D IVDs must submit samples of their device to an appropriately designated EURL for the EURL to verify performance claims and compliance to any common specifications. Manufacturers must then incorporate any feedback into their technical documentation. Prior to release of a batch of any Class D IVDs, manufacturers must wait for EURLs to confirm they have completed their tests.

Notified bodies will need to consult with EURLs when assessing certain high-risk IVDs and factor in EURL’s opinions into their assessment decisions. Notified bodies will also have to maintain communication with EURLs for post-market surveillance.

Implementation Challenges

Although the IVDR became fully applicable on 26 May 2022, implementation of the regulation has not necessarily been smooth. The timelines to which certain devices must be compliant to the IVDR have been extended more than once and establishing a EURL network has been challenging. Resources have been restrained, as building the necessary infrastructure and hiring the appropriate expertise has required significant investment and coordination.

As a result, the European Commission adopted a phased approach to EURL designation and until EURLs are fully operational for all relevant device categories, interim procedures have been established for the conformity assessment of class D IVDs. MDCG 2021-4 provides guidance on how EURLs should be integrated into the conformity assessment process when designated.

Current State of Play

The European Commission have designated the following 5 EURLs by the implementing act Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2713

Designated EU reference laboratoryScope of designation Class D devices intended for detection or quantification of markers of:
Consortium managed by Servicio Madrileño de Salud (SERMAS), Spain and composed of: Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón, Spain Hospital Universitario la Paz, Spain Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, SpainHerpesvirus infection Infection with bacterial agents
Consulting Químico Sanitario SLU (CQS), SpainHerpesvirus infection Infection with bacterial agents
EU Referenzlabor für In-vitro-Diagnostika am Paul-Ehrlich-Institut (PEI-IVD), Germany Hepatitis or retrovirus infection Respiratory virus infection
Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ISCIII), SpainHepatitis or retrovirus infection Herpesvirus infection  Infection with bacterial agents
RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB (RISE), SwedenRespiratory virus infection

These EURLs took up their tasks in the conformity assessment of devices on 1 October 2024.

In February 2025, the European Commission launched a further call for more applications to be submitted by Member States on behalf of their candidate laboratories for designation of EURLs. This call will be conducted in 2 waves.

The 1st wave is for the following categories of class D devices:

  • detection or quantification of markers of arbovirus infection
  • detection or quantification of markers of parasite infection
  • detection of blood grouping markers

Laboratories must submit applications to their Member State by 15 April 2025 (note: this date is indicative and laboratories should check with their specific Member State).

Member States must forward applications to the Commission by 6 June 2025.

The 2nd wave is for any of the following 8 categories of class D devices:

  • detection or quantification of markers of hepatitis or retrovirus infection 
  • detection or quantification of markers of herpesvirus infection 
  • detection or quantification of markers of infection with bacterial agents
  • detection or quantification of markers of arbovirus infection
  • detection or quantification of markers of respiratory virus infection
  • detection or quantification of markers of infection with haemorrhagic fever viruses or other biosafety level 4 viruses
  • detection or quantification of markers of parasite infection
  • detection of blood grouping markers

Laboratories must submit applications to their Member State by 15 January 2026 (note: this date is indicative and laboratories should check with their specific Member State).

Member States must forward applications to the Commission by 15 April 2026.

Conclusion

EURLs play a critical role in ensuring certain Class D IVDs are safe and effective. Although there are interim procedures in place for the conformity assessment of Class D IVDs, the IVD industry will benefit from the certainty of having enough designated EURLs to cover all categories of Class D devices.

Let’s hope this new call for further applications for designation of EURLs will provide additional resources the EU IVD industry desperately needs.

If you’re looking for a regulatory partner to offer compliance advise and support, get in touch with IVDeology today to begin your new partnership or email us at [email protected]

Reflections on the BIVDA Regulatory Affairs Seminar 2026

Reflections on the BIVDA Regulatory Affairs Seminar 2026

The BIVDA Regulatory Affairs Seminar 2026 lived up to its reputation as the UK’s leading diagnostics…

IVDR Reform: Key Implications for In Vitro Diagnostic Medical Devices

IVDR Reform: Key Implications for In Vitro Diagnostic Medical Devices

Executive Summary The proposed amendments to Regulation (EU) 2017/746 (IVDR) – rules on medical and …

Christmas Wishlist Innovation before Regulation

Christmas Wishlist Innovation before Regulation

As we push on the end of the year, and the festive spirit ramps up. It is worth asking “what is on y…

Shaping Your Regulatory Team For Success

Shaping Your Regulatory Team For Success

In today’s fast-evolving regulatory landscape, success isn’t just about compliance, it’s about build…

The ISO 13485 Journey: Transforming the QMS “Nightmare” into Opportunity

The ISO 13485 Journey: Transforming the QMS “Nightmare” into Opportunity

On Halloween, IVDeology’s Managing Director Stuart Angell outlines the daunting – some might even ca…

Leveraging Consultants in your Succession Plan

Leveraging Consultants in your Succession Plan

Building Resilient IVD Teams: Your Strategic Partnership for Growth and Change In the dynamic world …

You agree to receive email communication from us by submitting this form and understand that your contact information will be stored with us.

Posted on

Near-patient Testing – Is it the Future for Diagnostics?

There has been a lot of discussion surrounding the focus of treatment within primary care.  The NHS published guidance in August 2023 for integrating point of care IVD’s (NHS England » Integrating in vitro point of care diagnostics: guidance for urgent community response and virtual ward services).  The Labour Party’s recent manifesto for the 2024 General Election stated that “Labour’s reforms will shift our NHS away from a model geared towards late diagnosis and treatment, to a model where more services are delivered in local communities” and “The National Health Service needs to move to a Neighbourhood Health Service, with more care delivered in local communities to spot problems earlier. To achieve this, we must over time shift resources to primary care and community services.”  (Change Labour Party Manifesto 2024).  Whilst this is good news for patients, it is not as simple as changing the location of the testing – there will be implications for the IVD industry in order to meet these proposals.

The In Vitro Diagnostic Medical Devices Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2017/746, ‘IVDR’) defines a “device for near-patient testing” as “any device that is not intended for self-testing but is intended to perform testing outside a laboratory environment, generally near to, or at the side of, the patient by a health professional.”

During Design & Development, IVD manufacturers have to determine the use environment and end users within their intended purpose.  It is then their responsibility to demonstrate that the device is safe and effective when used in these environments by these intended end users and therefore there will be a number of additional requirements that need to be considered for devices intended for near-patient testing.

Performance Requirements:

The performance testing conducted will need to demonstrate that effective and reliable testing outside of the traditional controlled laboratory environments.  Considerations such as the following will need to be considered:

  • Use Environment Testing:

Annex I section 9.4 states “The characteristics and performances of the device shall be specifically checked in the event that they may be affected when the device is used for the intended use under normal conditions:

(b) for devices for near-patient testing, performances obtained in relevant environments (for example, patient home, emergency units, ambulances).

Testing of the device will therefore need to be conducted in the intended use environments. Manufacturers will need to show that the test can be used reliably in the environments that they indicate that the test can be used in. This could be, for example, doctor’s surgeries, A&E departments, patient’s homes or in ambulances.  Any conditions specific for these environments would need to be considered e.g. vibrations or temperature fluctuations for devices intended to be used on an ambulance.

  • Usability Studies:

Annex I section 19.1 states that “Devices intended for self-testing or near-patient testing shall be designed and manufactured in such a way that they perform appropriately for their intended purpose taking into account the skills and the means available to the intended user and the influence resulting from variation that can be reasonably anticipated in the intended user’s technique and environment. The information and instructions provided by the manufacturer shall be easy for the intended user to understand and apply in order to correctly interpret the result provided by the device and to avoid misleading information. In the case of near-patient testing, the information and the instructions provided by the manufacturer shall make clear the level of training, qualifications and/or experience required by the user.

It is important for manufacturers to have designed their device in such a way as to ensure that the intended end users can successfully use the device.  Therefore it is vital that manufacturers conduct usability studies with their target end users who are often not laboratory trained personnel.  This can then be used to demonstrate that consistent results can be obtained by these target end users, determine if the instructions provided with the device are adequate and help to identify if any training is required for the end users before the device can be used reliably.

Labelling Requirements:

The IVDR has also introduced specific labelling requirements for NPT (near patient testing) devices, including:

  • Devices labelled as Near-Patient Testing: The device label must indicate that the device is for near-patient testing.  Although there are currently no symbols for this within ISO 15223-1:2021 Medical devices – Symbols to be used with information to be supplied by the manufacturer, MedTech Europe has provided some suggested symbols that can be used to indicate near-patient testing (New IVD symbols for compliance with the IVDR – MedTech Europe).
  • Individual Instructions for Use: Each individual device must be accompanied by its own instructions for use (IFU).  For devices for professional use within a laboratory setting, if multiple devices were supplied then a single copy of the IFU could be provided if agreed by the purchaser.  This is not allowed for devices intended for near-patient testing.
  • Paper-Based Instructions: According to Annex I 20.1(f) of the IVDR, the instructions for use must be provided in a physical paper format for near-patient tests, and, unlike laboratory based professional use devices, cannot be provided in electronic format.
  • Language Requirements: The languages that the Member States require for the device label and instructions for use for near-patient testing may be different to those for professional use only tests.  This may add more translation costs on to manufacturers to access different markets.

The labelling provided must be appropriate to the device, its intended use, and the technical knowledge, experience, education, or training of the intended users.  This will need to be considered by manufacturers when designing the labelling and tested during usability studies.

Notified Body Assessment

Whilst devices for near-patient testing are classified in their own right according to Annex VIII rule 4(b), the notified body assessment is slightly different.  For Class B & Class C devices, the technical documentation of all devices for near-patient testing has to be assessed rather than the notified bodies sampling one technical file per generic device group or device category. Where a manufacturer has a number of devices for near-patient testing the increase of upfront cost to have their devices assessed will need to be considered.

Final thoughts

Whilst near-patient testing seems like a real win for patients and the direction of travel that the diagnostic industry is heading, this does provide some challenges for manufacturers.  The additional burden to demonstrate that the device is effective and reliable when used outside of a laboratory setting and the potential increased upfront costs of conformity assessment is something that needs to be considered before being able to place the device on the market.  For Great Britain, although the UK MDR 2002 does not specifically call out devices for near-patient testing currently, the indications from the MHRA on the future regulations is that it will be similar to the IVD Regulation with the new Essential Requirements being based on the General Safety & Performance Requirements.  This is likely therefore to mean that the additional requirements for these types of devices will also be required here.  However, if done correctly, near-patient testing will enable quicker diagnoses for patients and hopefully therefore better patient outcomes, which is ultimately what the IVD industry wants to support.

If you’d like to discuss near-patient testing or any of the compliance services that come along with it, from design and development to regulatory services, you can speak to us by dropping an email to [email protected] or book time with us via this link for when best suits you

Posted on

Performance Evaluation: The critical component in bringing your product to market and keeping it there

Abingdon Health and IVDeology Ltd have decades of  In-Vitro Diagnostic (IVD) regulatory compliance experience where our teams support your entire product journey from ‘cradle-to-grave’ to ensure you are getting your product to market in the quickest timeframe possible, reducing cost and strain, and keeping it compliant through its lifetime.

Abingdon Health also offer full-service contract development and manufacturing for lateral flow assays, bringing your idea to commercial success, with the benefit of an integrated regulatory and quality approach.

In our latest blog, Candice Vendettuoli Head of RAQA at Abingdon Health covers the importance of getting your Performance Evaluation (PE) right to streamline your route to market, and ensuring compliance to keep it there.

What is Performance Evaluation?

The In Vitro Diagnostic Regulation (IVDR) 2017/746, which entered into force in May 2017 and applied in May 2022, has introduced significant changes to the way in vitro diagnostic (IVD) medical devices are regulated in the European Union. One of the key aspects of this regulation are the new requirements for documenting the performance evaluation of IVD medical devices using a prescriptive document structure mandated within the Regulation.

Performance evaluation under IVDR is expected to be a continuous process throughout its entire lifecycle of the device. This process is crucial for ensuring that the device meets upon entry to the market, and continues to meet, the intended clinical benefits and safety as claimed by the manufacturer.

The mandated documents should be written to provide a comprehensive and structured narrative for the reviewer giving a clear and logical explanation of how the device was developed, verified and validated against the intended use/purpose claimed by the manufacturer. These documents are a requirement of the Technial Documentation described in Annex II and forms an essential part of the submission to the Notified Body

The mandated documents, unless they can justify why such studies are not applicable are as follows:

Performance Evaluation Plan

Ideally written during the early development of the device and updated regularly, this document has content prescribed within Annex XIII section 1.1 of the Regulation. Manufacturers are required to establish and regularly update the performance evaluation plan that outlines the device’s characteristics and performance, as well as the process and criteria used to generate the necessary clinical evidence.

Scientific Validity

The concept of scientific validity under the In Vitro Diagnostic Regulation (IVDR) 2017/746 is a cornerstone in the performance evaluation of in vitro diagnostic (IVD) medical devices. It refers to the association of an analyte with a clinical condition or physiological state, which must be substantiated with a medical-scientific rationale evidenced through a systematic literature search

Analytical Performance

Analytical performance refers to a device’s ability to accurately and reproducibly measure an analyte, marker, or molecule, which is a strictly technical performance without the need for correlation with a targeted pathology.  There are analytical performance characteristics mandated within Annex I section 9.1(a) including assessing the accuracy, sensitivity and specificity,

Clinical Performance

Clinical performance is defined as the ability of a device to yield results that are correlated with a particular clinical condition, physiological or pathological process, or target population and intended user. Manufacturers must demonstrate clinical performance through one or more of the following:

  • Clinical performance studies, carried out according to the IVDR requirements on clinical performance studies described in Articles 57-77, Annex XIII section 2 and, if applicable, Annex XIV for studies other than those using leftover samples
  • Scientific peer-reviewed literature on the device under evaluation, or
  • Published routine diagnostic testing.

Performance Evaluation Report

The report (also known as a ‘PER’) provides a summary of the clinical evidence collected through the previous reports. An assessment can then be made against the current state of the art in diagnostics and medicine that a positive benefit-risk ratio of using the device for its intended purpose has been met and then all data has been collected.

This rigorous approach ensures the reliability and effectiveness of in vitro diagnostic devices within the European Union, with the primary aim of protecting public health by requiring high levels of safety and performance of these devices to be evidenced.

For manufacturers, understanding and adhering to the IVDR’s performance evaluation requirements is vital for successful market introduction of their IVDs in the European Market. It involves a comprehensive understanding of the general safety and performance requirements (GSPR), as well as the specific guidelines on performance evaluation stipulated in Article 56 of the IVDR.

Abingdon Health and through its subsidiary IVDeology Ltd , can offer support and guidance to help companies navigate these new and complex EU Performance Evaluation requirements.

We offer a full-service solution for all your regulatory and quality requirements including:

Contact Us today to book some time with one of our industry experts to understand how we can support you bringing your product to market and keeping it there.


 

Posted on

EUDAMED: A recap for what it means for you

IVDeology are a UK based regulatory and quality compliance support company, with over 100 years combined of expertise within our team, providing you everything you need for your in-vitro diagnostic device life cycle to support you on your compliance journey. In this most recent blog written by Regulatory specialist TszWai Woo takes a look at what EUDAMED is, and what the changes mean to you.

The Medical Devices Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2017/745, ‘MDR’) and the In Vitro Diagnostic Medical Devices Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2017/746, ‘IVDR’) introduced the requirement of EUDAMED, the European database on medical devices. It has been over 3 and 2 years, respectively, since the date of application of the MDR and IVDR, and even after several transition extensions and amendments to both regulations, EUDAMED is still a way off from being fully functional.

With another proposed Regulation (2024/0021 (COD)) due to be published in the Official Journal of the European Union, it is worth having a recap on what EUDAMED is, the current status and what changes the new regulation will introduce.

What is EUDAMED?

EUDAMED is a European database on medical devices that the European Commission was to set up, maintain and manage, as required by the MDR and IVDR. The aim of EUDAMED is to improve transparency and provide information on medical devices on the EU market to the public and healthcare professionals. It also aims to improve medical device traceability, enhance coordination between the EU National Competent Authorities and provide them with easy access to relevant regulatory information.

EUDAMED contains information on medical devices which are organised into the following 6 categories, also known as modules:

  • Actor registration
  • UDI/Devices registration
  • Notified Bodies and Certificates (except for the mechanism for scrutiny and the clinical evaluation consultation procedure (CECP) functionalities)
  • Clinical Investigations and Performance Studies
  • Vigilance and post-market surveillance
  • Market Surveillance

A lot of the information within EUDAMED is to be accessible to the public via a public website.

Current State of Play

To date, only the following 3 modules have been available for voluntary use:

  • Actor registration (since December 2020)
  • UDI/Devices registration (since Oct 2021)
  • Notified Bodies and Certificates (since Oct 2021)

Therefore, manufacturers can submit their organisation and device details on a voluntary basis.

For Actor registration, as well as providing the organisation details, all manufacturers will need to provide a declaration on information security responsibilities and non-EU manufacturers will also need to provide a mandate summary document.

For UDI/Device registration, manufacturer will need to submit device information such as the Basic UDI-DI & UDI-DI, the European Medical Device Nomenclature (EMDN) and notified body (NB) certificate information (if applicable). For devices requiring NB conformity assessment, the NB must confirm the device information in EUDAMED before the device can be publicly available. Therefore, conformity assessment must be completed before prior to registering a device in EUDAMED.

NBs can register certificates and Summaries of Safety and Clinical Performance (SSCP) on voluntary basis. However, there is a caveat: all the parties referenced in the certificates must first be registered, also on a voluntary basis, in EUDAMED.

Additionally, the ‘Vigilance and post-market surveillance’ and ‘Market Surveillance’ modules are due to be made available Q2/2024 and the ‘Clinical Investigations and Performance Studies’ module is not due to be made available before Q3/2026.

EUDAMED was intended to be mandatory for all economic operators to use, after all 6 modules were declared fully functional following an independent audit and a Commission notice was published in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Proposed changes to EUDAMED requirements

Instead of waiting for the completion of the 6th module to make the use of EUDAMED mandatory, 2024/0021 (COD) proposes a gradual roll-out of the mandatory use of each EUDAMED module, once they have been audited and declared functional.

This means that the mandatory use of 3 modules (Actor registration, UDI/Device registration and Notified Bodies & certificates) could therefore start in Q4/2025.

Given the requirements of Article 123 (3) (d) MDR/113 (3) (f) IVDR and Article 123 (3) (e) MDR/113 (3) (a) IVDR, this would mean that mandatory use of all six modules cannot be expected before Q4/2027 and final transitional periods will not end before Q2/2029.

Final Thoughts

Whilst the medical device industry waits with bated breath for the proposed regulation to be published in the Official Journal of the European Union, it is advisable that manufacturers ensure they understand and have all the information they need for the EUDAMED Actor and UDI/Devices registration processes. Hopefully, the proposal will encourage more manufacturers to register on a voluntary basis, as delays in the module development have resulted in low adoption of EUDAMED.

As a UK provider of quality and regulatory services, IVDeology are proud to engage with the IVD industry and keen to support IVD manufacturers with IVD devices market access. For further information on how we can help, please contact [email protected] or you can book straight into our calendar here

Note: This blog contains a summary of the key changes within the proposal, it is important that Manufacturers read and understand the proposal in full, and get independent legal advice if required.

Posted on

Notified Bodies Survey on certifications and applications (MDR/IVDR)

Last week saw the revised version of the Notified Bodies Survey on certifications and applications (MDR/IVDR) published by the European Commission. [Survey NBs availability (europa.eu)]

While there are still no conclusions made from the results of the survey, it does offer a useful insight on the current state of play for the transition to the MDR for medical devices and IVDR for in-vitro diagnostics.

The challenges the industry has faced to achieve compliance to the new regulations has been widely discussed [refer to previous blogs], resulting in continued delays to the implementation of the regulations, based largely on the state of readiness of the regulatory infrastructure of the EU system.

The regulation has been designed “to ensure the smooth functioning of the internal market as regards in vitro diagnostic medical devices, taking as a base a high level of protection of health for patients and users, and taking into account the small and medium-sized enterprises that are active in this sector.”

From <https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32017R0746&qid=1685433681978>

 In reality, the challenge for SMEs to comply to the new IVDR is great, given the additional data burden, time, and money required to obtain a CE mark. I have often wondered if the EU market is a step too far as a 1st launch country for SMEs, over the opportunity of US market access – and the UK (if the regulators can identify a pragmatic approach under IDAP).

It is therefore an interest to see the graph shown in the report:

The survey highlighted that the NB have SMEs as their main clients for conformity assessment, this is a positive message in that SMEs are still preparing for IVDR compliance, and it will be interesting to see how the implementation of IVDR is achieved for small and medium size businesses.

Here at IVDeology, an immediate question that came from the information above is that the definition of SME encompasses a large number of organisations but internally the teams can vary in size, and the ones we commonly work with here at IVDeology would be at the lower end of the scale. It would be good to know the spread of size of SME’s out there so that we can understand the landscape and dynamic of those hoping to grow.

IVDeology works throughout the whole IVD industry, including supporting SMEs along their path to compliance. For further information on how we can support you, contact [email protected]