Pick the right route

Submission Pathway Selector

Five questions → 510(k), De Novo, or PMA recommendation, with the cybersecurity evidence delta for each pathway under the FDA's Feb 3, 2026 final premarket guidance.

Reviewed by

Christian Espinosa

Founder & CEO, Blue Goat Cyber

Last reviewed October 12, 2026

Device / product line

Is there a legally marketed predicate device with similar intended use and technological characteristics?

What is the device's risk class / probable level of patient harm?

Does the device introduce a new technological feature without a precedent (e.g. new modality, new biological interface, new AI claim)?

What clinical evidence will support safety and effectiveness?

What is the device's connectivity and software profile?

What you'll see after you submit

Answers → pathway recommendation + cybersecurity delta per route

Primary recommendation (510(k), De Novo, or PMA) with a plain-English rationale.
Alternates listed when the call is close, so you walk into a Pre-Sub with options.
Per-pathway cybersecurity evidence delta - what's identical and what's different.
JSON export to hand to regulatory affairs.

Common misconceptions

What teams usually get wrong

Myth: Cyber evidence is the same for 510(k) and PMA.
Reality: The artifacts are largely the same; the depth, validation rigor, and Q-Sub interaction differ. PMA reviewers go deeper on threat-model traceability and clinical-risk linkage.
Myth: De Novo means lighter cyber than 510(k).
Reality: De Novo establishes a new classification - the FDA often sets the cyber bar high precisely because there's no predicate. Expect the full §524B package.
Myth: Pathway is purely a regulatory decision; product security can wait.
Reality: Pathway choice changes the Pre-Sub strategy for cybersecurity. Engage product security before pathway is locked.