Category: First-in-Human

Figures cited from a ClinicalTrials.gov LATAM facility sweep (API pull 1 September 2026, 6:32 PM ET) and published bioaccess® country pages. Registry ranking is not a bioaccess® claim that we ran any of these studies. General information, not legal or regulatory advice. Confirm current COFEPRIS, ethics, and FDA rules with qualified advisers. We name only the facility strings and example NCT IDs those sources support. We do not invent a principal investigator. We do not claim Investigación y Biomedicina de Chihuahua as a bioaccess® client.

If you searched Investigacion y Biomedicina de Chihuahua first-in-human, Biomedicina Chihuahua clinical trial, IyB Chihuahua CRO, or “go direct Investigación y Biomedicina de Chihuahua,” you followed a campus string ClinicalTrials.gov still publishes. Investigacion y Biomedicina de Chihuahua, S.C. in Chihuahua City, Mexico, is a real named research-site string on ClinicalTrials.gov. It is not a first-in-human medical-device CRO, and it is not the operator of the COFEPRIS file.

bioaccess®’s position is simple and it is not adversarial: the site is the site. The First-in-Human CRO still owns COFEPRIS, accredited ethics, investigational import, insurance, ISO 14155 monitoring, and the FDA 21 CFR 812.28 package — plus the option to add Colombia or another Latin American country if this campus is not the only fit. Sponsors who skip the CRO and email the site still have to rebuild that stack. An NCT location row is not a CRO.

This page is the named Chihuahua Investigación y Biomedicina campus. It is not Scientia Investigación Clínica Chihuahua (already published), not LAHOJA Durango, not Instituto Jalisciense, and not Arké SMO Veracruz (separate page). Sharing northern Mexico is not a license to collapse them. Chihuahua is not Durango.

Why the campus name wins the search — and why that is not a CRO

Device registries write the city, the hospital, and a list of NCT IDs. They rarely write the CRO. On the 1 September 2026 ClinicalTrials.gov LATAM sweep (interventional studies; all years), this campus sits here after filters:

Counts are unique NCT IDs from a ClinicalTrials.gov sweep of Latin American facilities pulled 1 September 2026.

• Investigacion y Biomedicina de Chihuahua, S.C. (Chihuahua City, Mexico) — canonical NCT string: ALL interventional n=13; DEVICE n=0. Example NCT IDs: NCT01972568, NCT02070978, NCT02744755. Legal-suffix aliases listed separately (without S.C. ALL n=10; S.C. ALL n=4; SC ALL n=3) — not combined.

Those are unique NCT IDs per facility string + city + country. They are not a count of first-in-human device programs bioaccess® ran. They are how a sponsor searching the hospital name lands on a campus without landing on an operator.

We cite the IDs as facility evidence. We will not invent a PI. We will not claim bioaccess® ran any of them. No live bioaccess® case-study page names this site as a client site.

That is the leak: a founder searching “Biomedicina Chihuahua first-in-human” finds ALL n=13 (DEVICE n=0) without finding COFEPRIS. A named research site is still a site. An NCT location row is not a CRO.

The site is the site. The CRO is the operator.

A named site can provide rooms, coordinators, institutional ethics calendars, and investigators who already appear on NCT rows. That is necessary. It is not sufficient for a first-in-human medical device study a U.S. board expects to survive FDA review.

What the site can typically do when a sponsor “goes direct”:

• Discuss investigator interest and whether a protocol can sit in an existing service line.
• Share institutional ethics-committee calendars and hospital research rules.
• Quote visit, staffing, and local procedure costs for the cases they will physically run.

What the site is not built to own for an investigational device:

• COFEPRIS. COFEPRIS governs device investigations in Mexico. Ethics committee review comes first, then COFEPRIS review; bioaccess® confirms the calendar per protocol. A hallway conversation on this campus is not that file. A hallway conversation at Investigación y Biomedicina is not a Scientia file.
• Investigational import. Ethics letter, investigator’s brochure, and an importation permit — end-to-end work, not a PI email. See importer of record for clinical trial devices in Latin America.
• Clinical trial insurance. Required. We will not invent a campus-only premium here.
• ISO 14155 monitoring, EDC, SAE reporting, and the TMF. The site may run visits. The CRO runs the quality system the FDA will later ask about.
• The 21 CFR 812.28 package. Foreign data is eligible for FDA submission and review after GCP / ethics documentation. Eligibility is not clearance, and a site MSA does not produce it.
• Multi-country optionality. If enrollment or the indication later needs another Latin American country, a single-hospital MSA will not stretch.

Going direct to this campus is how you confirm a room. It is not how you open an investigational file.

How COFEPRIS actually works (the short version)

Use Clinical Trials in Mexico and CRO in Mexico. Ethics committee review comes first, then COFEPRIS review; bioaccess® confirms the calendar per protocol. Keep trial clocks separate from registro sanitario (~30 working days on that hub). Eligibility of foreign data under 21 CFR 812.28 is not a guarantee of clearance.

Ask for a protocol-specific calendar. A hospital email is not COFEPRIS clearance. bioaccess® manages the file. That is CRO work, not site work.

All bioaccess® device protocols in this country are run under ISO 14155 and the Declaration of Helsinki. Data is designed to be eligible for FDA submission and review under 21 CFR 812.28 on a case-by-case basis — not a guarantee of clearance or approval. See OUS FIH and FDA IDE.

Not a critique of the hospital

Investigación y Biomedicina de Chihuahua is a serious named Chihuahua research site on the public registry. ALL n=13 is registry volume, not a punchline. We do not invent a DEVICE n. Use the site when the protocol fits. Hire the operator.

What the CRO still does after you have the campus on a slide

1. Regulatory-fit, not tourism. This geography is sourced. One campus is not automatically the right room for every indication. bioaccess® still runs trials in Colombia and the rest of the platform.
2. Protocol, IB, ICF, insurance, and the COFEPRIS / ethics packet.
3. Importer of record and device accountability.
4. Site activation that is more than a tour: contracts, training, investigational product, EDC, monitoring plan. Activate this campus only if it fits the protocol.
5. ISO 14155 monitoring and the 21 CFR 812.28 narrative so the dataset is built for a later Pre-Sub, IDE, 510(k), De Novo, PMA, or HDE — eligibility, not a promise of FDA action.

The firm was founded in 2010. That is the operator layer around a campus string.

Colombia is still on the map

Public line: bioaccess® runs first-in-human studies in Colombia now — local entity, Miami headquarters, own CRO in Colombia. Colombia’s regulatory framework is changing for the better. INVIMA commercial registration remains. Ethics timing in Panama and Colombia follows each committee’s meeting schedule. The country page’s published per-patient comparison: $12K–$22K vs. $15K–$25K as published on Clinical Trials in Panama. We pick the country the device needs. The founder podcast is Global Trial Accelerators™.

Frequently asked questions

Can I contract Investigación y Biomedicina de Chihuahua directly for a device FIH?

You can try. The site can discuss investigator interest, local visit costs, and ethics calendars. It cannot, by ranking on ClinicalTrials.gov, become your COFEPRIS applicant, importer of record, insurer, ISO 14155 monitor, or 21 CFR 812.28 packager. Contract the CRO, then let the CRO activate the site if the site fits.

Did bioaccess® run the NCT IDs listed here?

No public bioaccess® case-study page names this site. We will not invent that claim. This page answers the search; it does not claim the studies.

Is this the same page as Scientia Chihuahua?

No. Scientia Investigación Clínica Chihuahua is already published. This page is Investigación y Biomedicina only.

Did bioaccess® run NCT01972568?

No. We cite it as facility evidence. We will not invent a sponsor or a PI.

Next step

If the search that brought you here was this campus, start as the operator: contact bioaccess® or book from First-in-Human CRO. Chihuahua sibling (do not merge): Scientia Chihuahua.

Julio G. Martinez-Clark, CEO · bioaccess®

Figures cited from a ClinicalTrials.gov LATAM facility sweep (API pull 1 September 2026, 6:32 PM ET) and published bioaccess® country pages. Registry ranking is not a bioaccess® claim that we ran any of these studies. General information, not legal or regulatory advice. Confirm current ANVISA, ethics, and FDA rules with qualified advisers. We name only the facility strings and example NCT IDs those sources support. We do not invent a principal investigator. We do not claim Federal University of Uberlândia as a bioaccess® client.

If you searched Federal University of Uberlandia first-in-human, UFU Uberlândia clinical trial, Universidade Federal de Uberlandia CRO, or “go direct Federal University of Uberlândia,” you followed a campus string ClinicalTrials.gov still publishes. Federal University of Uberlândia (Uberlândia, Brazil) is a real named university-hospital string on ClinicalTrials.gov. It is not a first-in-human medical-device CRO, and it is not the operator of the ANVISA file.

bioaccess®’s position is simple and it is not adversarial: the university campus is the site. The First-in-Human CRO still owns ANVISA, CEP / CONEP, investigational import, insurance, ISO 14155 monitoring, and the FDA 21 CFR 812.28 package — plus the option to add Colombia or another Latin American country if this campus is not the only fit. Sponsors who skip the CRO and email the university campus still have to rebuild that stack. An NCT location row is not a CRO.

This page is the named Uberlândia UFU campus. It is not UNESP Botucatu, not Universidade Federal Fluminense Nova Friburgo, not Universidade Federal dos Vales do Jequitinhonha e Mucuri, and not UNICAMP (already published). Sharing “Federal University” is not a license to collapse them. Uberlândia is not Campinas.

Why the campus name wins the search — and why that is not a CRO

Device registries write the city, the hospital, and a list of NCT IDs. They rarely write the CRO. On the 1 September 2026 ClinicalTrials.gov LATAM sweep (interventional studies; all years), this campus sits here after filters:

Counts are unique NCT IDs from a ClinicalTrials.gov sweep of Latin American facilities pulled 1 September 2026.

• Federal University of Uberlandia (Uberlândia, Brazil) — canonical NCT string: ALL interventional n=12; DEVICE n=1. Example NCT IDs: NCT01482429, NCT02139631, NCT02931734. Accent alias Federal University of Uberlândia ALL n=3 listed separately — not combined.

Those are unique NCT IDs per facility string + city + country. They are not a count of first-in-human device programs bioaccess® ran. They are how a sponsor searching the hospital name lands on a campus without landing on an operator.

We cite the IDs as facility evidence. We will not invent a PI. We will not claim bioaccess® ran any of them. No live bioaccess® case-study page names this university campus as a client site.

That is the leak: a founder searching “UFU Uberlândia first-in-human” finds ALL n=12 (DEVICE n=1) without finding ANVISA. A named university campus is still a site. An NCT location row is not a CRO.

The site is the site. The CRO is the operator.

A named university campus can provide rooms, coordinators, institutional ethics calendars, and investigators who already appear on NCT rows. That is necessary. It is not sufficient for a first-in-human medical device study a U.S. board expects to survive FDA review.

What the university campus can typically do when a sponsor “goes direct”:

• Discuss investigator interest and whether a protocol can sit in an existing service line.
• Share institutional ethics-committee calendars and hospital research rules.
• Quote visit, staffing, and local procedure costs for the cases they will physically run.

What the university campus is not built to own for an investigational device:

• ANVISA. Device investigations sit under RDC 837/2023 (dossier in Portuguese: IB, protocol, ICF, insurance, GMP evidence). A hallway conversation at this campus is not that dossier. A hallway conversation in Uberlândia is not a UNICAMP file.
• Investigational import. Ethics letter, investigator’s brochure, and an importation permit — end-to-end work, not a PI email. See importer of record for clinical trial devices in Latin America.
• Clinical trial insurance. Required. We will not invent a campus-only premium here.
• ISO 14155 monitoring, EDC, SAE reporting, and the TMF. The site may run visits. The CRO runs the quality system the FDA will later ask about.
• The 21 CFR 812.28 package. Foreign data is eligible for FDA submission and review after GCP / ethics documentation. Eligibility is not clearance, and a site MSA does not produce it.
• Multi-country optionality. If enrollment or the indication later needs another Latin American country, a single-hospital MSA will not stretch.

Going direct to this campus is how you confirm a room. It is not how you open an investigational file.

How ANVISA actually works (the short version)

Use Clinical Trials in Brazil: combined ethics + ANVISA typically 6–10 weeks under Law 14874 and RDC 837/2023; CEPs capped at 30 business days; published per-patient range $20,000–$35,000. Trial authorization and later market registration are separate workstreams.

Ask for a protocol-specific calendar. A hospital email is not ANVISA clearance. bioaccess® manages the file. That is CRO work, not site work.

All bioaccess® device protocols in this country are run under ISO 14155 and the Declaration of Helsinki. Data is designed to be eligible for FDA submission and review under 21 CFR 812.28 on a case-by-case basis — not a guarantee of clearance or approval. See OUS FIH and FDA IDE.

Not a critique of the hospital

Federal University of Uberlândia is a serious named campus on the public registry. ALL n=12 is registry volume, not a punchline. We do not invent a DEVICE n beyond 1. Use the site when the protocol fits. Hire the operator.

What the CRO still does after you have the campus on a slide

1. Regulatory-fit, not tourism. This geography is sourced. One campus is not automatically the right room for every indication. bioaccess® still runs trials in Colombia and the rest of the platform.
2. Protocol, IB, ICF, insurance, and the ANVISA / ethics packet.
3. Importer of record and device accountability.
4. Site activation that is more than a tour: contracts, training, investigational product, EDC, monitoring plan. Activate this campus only if it fits the protocol.
5. ISO 14155 monitoring and the 21 CFR 812.28 narrative so the dataset is built for a later Pre-Sub, IDE, 510(k), De Novo, PMA, or HDE — eligibility, not a promise of FDA action.

The firm was founded in 2010. That is the operator layer around a campus string.

Colombia is still on the map

Public line: bioaccess® runs first-in-human studies in Colombia now — local entity, Miami headquarters, own CRO in Colombia. Colombia’s regulatory framework is changing for the better. INVIMA commercial registration remains. Ethics timing in Panama and Colombia follows each committee’s meeting schedule. The country page’s published per-patient comparison: $12K–$22K vs. $15K–$25K as published on Clinical Trials in Panama. We pick the country the device needs. The founder podcast is Global Trial Accelerators™.

Frequently asked questions

Can I contract Federal University of Uberlândia directly for a device FIH?

You can try. The university campus can discuss investigator interest, local visit costs, and ethics calendars. It cannot, by ranking on ClinicalTrials.gov, become your ANVISA applicant, importer of record, insurer, ISO 14155 monitor, or 21 CFR 812.28 packager. Contract the CRO, then let the CRO activate the site if the site fits.

Did bioaccess® run the NCT IDs listed here?

No public bioaccess® case-study page names this university campus. We will not invent that claim. This page answers the search; it does not claim the studies.

Is this the same page as UNICAMP or UNESP Botucatu?

No. University of Campinas is already published. UNESP Botucatu is already published. This page is UFU Uberlândia only.

Did bioaccess® run NCT01482429?

No. We cite it as facility evidence. We will not invent a sponsor or a PI.

Next step

If the search that brought you here was this campus, start as the operator: contact bioaccess® or book from First-in-Human CRO. Brazil sibling (do not merge): University of Campinas.

Julio G. Martinez-Clark, CEO · bioaccess®

Figures cited from a ClinicalTrials.gov LATAM facility sweep (API pull 1 September 2026, 6:32 PM ET) and published bioaccess® country pages. Registry ranking is not a bioaccess® claim that we ran any of these studies. General information, not legal or regulatory advice. Confirm current ANVISA, ethics, and FDA rules with qualified advisers. We name only the facility strings and example NCT IDs those sources support. We do not invent a principal investigator. We do not claim Hospital Santa Izabel Salvador as a bioaccess® client.

If you searched Hospital Santa Izabel Salvador first-in-human, Santa Izabel Bahia clinical trial, Santa Izabel CRO, or “go direct Hospital Santa Izabel Salvador,” you followed a campus string ClinicalTrials.gov still publishes. Hospital Santa Izabel in Salvador, Brazil, is a real named hospital string on ClinicalTrials.gov. It is not a first-in-human medical-device CRO, and it is not the operator of the ANVISA file.

bioaccess®’s position is simple and it is not adversarial: the hospital is the site. The First-in-Human CRO still owns ANVISA, CEP / CONEP, investigational import, insurance, ISO 14155 monitoring, and the FDA 21 CFR 812.28 package — plus the option to add Colombia or another Latin American country if this campus is not the only fit. Sponsors who skip the CRO and email the hospital still have to rebuild that stack. An NCT location row is not a CRO.

This page is the named Salvador Santa Izabel campus. It is not Centro de Atenção ao Assoalho Pélvico Salvador, not Hospital Lifecenter Belo Horizonte, not Hospital de Messejana Fortaleza, and not Clementino/UFRJ (not covered on this page). Sharing Brazil is not a license to collapse them. Salvador is not Rio.

Why the campus name wins the search — and why that is not a CRO

Device registries write the city, the hospital, and a list of NCT IDs. They rarely write the CRO. On the 1 September 2026 ClinicalTrials.gov LATAM sweep (interventional studies; all years), this campus sits here after filters:

Counts are unique NCT IDs from a ClinicalTrials.gov sweep of Latin American facilities pulled 1 September 2026.

• Hospital Santa Izabel (Salvador, Brazil) — canonical NCT string: ALL interventional n=11; DEVICE n=1. Example NCT IDs: NCT00400478, NCT00424476, NCT01856088. Numbered alias 0760025 – Hospital Santa Izabel ALL n=1 listed separately — not combined.

Those are unique NCT IDs per facility string + city + country. They are not a count of first-in-human device programs bioaccess® ran. They are how a sponsor searching the hospital name lands on a campus without landing on an operator.

We cite the IDs as facility evidence. We will not invent a PI. We will not claim bioaccess® ran any of them. No live bioaccess® case-study page names this hospital as a client site.

That is the leak: a founder searching “Santa Izabel Salvador first-in-human” finds ALL n=11 (DEVICE n=1) without finding ANVISA. A named hospital is still a site. An NCT location row is not a CRO.

The site is the site. The CRO is the operator.

A named hospital can provide rooms, coordinators, institutional ethics calendars, and investigators who already appear on NCT rows. That is necessary. It is not sufficient for a first-in-human medical device study a U.S. board expects to survive FDA review.

What the hospital can typically do when a sponsor “goes direct”:

• Discuss investigator interest and whether a protocol can sit in an existing service line.
• Share institutional ethics-committee calendars and hospital research rules.
• Quote visit, staffing, and local procedure costs for the cases they will physically run.

What the hospital is not built to own for an investigational device:

• ANVISA. Device investigations sit under RDC 837/2023 (dossier in Portuguese: IB, protocol, ICF, insurance, GMP evidence). A hallway conversation at this campus is not that dossier. A hallway conversation at Santa Izabel is not a Lifecenter file.
• Investigational import. Ethics letter, investigator’s brochure, and an importation permit — end-to-end work, not a PI email. See importer of record for clinical trial devices in Latin America.
• Clinical trial insurance. Required. We will not invent a campus-only premium here.
• ISO 14155 monitoring, EDC, SAE reporting, and the TMF. The site may run visits. The CRO runs the quality system the FDA will later ask about.
• The 21 CFR 812.28 package. Foreign data is eligible for FDA submission and review after GCP / ethics documentation. Eligibility is not clearance, and a site MSA does not produce it.
• Multi-country optionality. If enrollment or the indication later needs another Latin American country, a single-hospital MSA will not stretch.

Going direct to this campus is how you confirm a room. It is not how you open an investigational file.

How ANVISA actually works (the short version)

Use Clinical Trials in Brazil: combined ethics + ANVISA typically 6–10 weeks under Law 14874 and RDC 837/2023; CEPs capped at 30 business days; published per-patient range $20,000–$35,000. Trial authorization and later market registration are separate workstreams.

Ask for a protocol-specific calendar. A hospital email is not ANVISA clearance. bioaccess® manages the file. That is CRO work, not site work.

All bioaccess® device protocols in this country are run under ISO 14155 and the Declaration of Helsinki. Data is designed to be eligible for FDA submission and review under 21 CFR 812.28 on a case-by-case basis — not a guarantee of clearance or approval. See OUS FIH and FDA IDE.

Not a critique of the hospital

Hospital Santa Izabel is a serious named Salvador hospital on the public registry. ALL n=11 is registry volume, not a punchline. We do not invent a DEVICE n beyond 1. Clementino/UFRJ is not covered on this page. Use the site when the protocol fits. Hire the operator.

What the CRO still does after you have the campus on a slide

1. Regulatory-fit, not tourism. This geography is sourced. One campus is not automatically the right room for every indication. bioaccess® still runs trials in Colombia and the rest of the platform.
2. Protocol, IB, ICF, insurance, and the ANVISA / ethics packet.
3. Importer of record and device accountability.
4. Site activation that is more than a tour: contracts, training, investigational product, EDC, monitoring plan. Activate this campus only if it fits the protocol.
5. ISO 14155 monitoring and the 21 CFR 812.28 narrative so the dataset is built for a later Pre-Sub, IDE, 510(k), De Novo, PMA, or HDE — eligibility, not a promise of FDA action.

The firm was founded in 2010. That is the operator layer around a campus string.

Colombia is still on the map

Public line: bioaccess® runs first-in-human studies in Colombia now — local entity, Miami headquarters, own CRO in Colombia. Colombia’s regulatory framework is changing for the better. INVIMA commercial registration remains. Ethics timing in Panama and Colombia follows each committee’s meeting schedule. The country page’s published per-patient comparison: $12K–$22K vs. $15K–$25K as published on Clinical Trials in Panama. We pick the country the device needs. The founder podcast is Global Trial Accelerators™.

Frequently asked questions

Can I contract Hospital Santa Izabel Salvador directly for a device FIH?

You can try. The hospital can discuss investigator interest, local visit costs, and ethics calendars. It cannot, by ranking on ClinicalTrials.gov, become your ANVISA applicant, importer of record, insurer, ISO 14155 monitor, or 21 CFR 812.28 packager. Contract the CRO, then let the CRO activate the site if the site fits.

Did bioaccess® run the NCT IDs listed here?

No public bioaccess® case-study page names this hospital. We will not invent that claim. This page answers the search; it does not claim the studies.

Is this the same page as Lifecenter or Messejana?

No. Hospital Lifecenter has its own page. Hospital de Messejana has its own page. This page is Santa Izabel Salvador only.

Did bioaccess® run NCT00400478?

No. We cite it as facility evidence. We will not invent a sponsor or a PI.

Next step

If the search that brought you here was this campus, start as the operator: contact bioaccess® or book from First-in-Human CRO. Brazil sibling (do not merge): Lifecenter Belo Horizonte.

Julio G. Martinez-Clark, CEO · bioaccess®

Figures cited from a ClinicalTrials.gov LATAM facility sweep (API pull 1 September 2026, 6:32 PM ET) and published bioaccess® country pages. Registry ranking is not a bioaccess® claim that we ran any of these studies. General information, not legal or regulatory advice. Confirm current ANMAT, ethics, and FDA rules with qualified advisers. We name only the facility strings and example NCT IDs those sources support. We do not invent a principal investigator. We do not claim Centro Oncológico Korben Buenos Aires as a bioaccess® client.

If you searched Centro Oncologico Korben first-in-human, Korben Buenos Aires clinical trial, Korben CRO, or “go direct Centro Oncológico Korben Buenos Aires,” you followed a campus string ClinicalTrials.gov still publishes. Centro Oncológico Korben in Buenos Aires, Argentina, is a real named oncology-center string on ClinicalTrials.gov. It is not a first-in-human medical-device CRO, and it is not the operator of the ANMAT file.

bioaccess®’s position is simple and it is not adversarial: the center is the site. The First-in-Human CRO still owns ANMAT, accredited ethics, investigational import, insurance, ISO 14155 monitoring, and the FDA 21 CFR 812.28 package — plus the option to add Colombia or another Latin American country if this campus is not the only fit. Sponsors who skip the CRO and email the center still have to rebuild that stack. An NCT location row is not a CRO.

This page is the named Buenos Aires Korben campus. It is not Sanatorio Finochietto, not Clínica Privada Independencia Munro, not Fundación Estudio Tratamiento Enfermedades Mentales, and not Instituto Médico Especializado IME (separate page). Sharing CABA is not a license to collapse them. Munro is not Korben.

Why the campus name wins the search — and why that is not a CRO

Device registries write the city, the hospital, and a list of NCT IDs. They rarely write the CRO. On the 1 September 2026 ClinicalTrials.gov LATAM sweep (interventional studies; all years), this campus sits here after filters:

Counts are unique NCT IDs from a ClinicalTrials.gov sweep of Latin American facilities pulled 1 September 2026.

• Centro Oncologico Korben (Buenos Aires, Argentina) — canonical NCT string: ALL interventional n=12; DEVICE n=0. Example NCT IDs: NCT05262400, NCT05288166, NCT05325866. Accent / CABA city aliases listed separately (Centro Oncológico Korben ALL n=8 DEVICE n=1; Caba ALL n=5; CABA ALL n=2) — not combined.

Counts for CABA aliases are kept separate.

Those are unique NCT IDs per facility string + city + country. They are not a count of first-in-human device programs bioaccess® ran. They are how a sponsor searching the hospital name lands on a campus without landing on an operator.

We cite the IDs as facility evidence. We will not invent a PI. We will not claim bioaccess® ran any of them. No live bioaccess® case-study page names this center as a client site.

That is the leak: a founder searching “Korben first-in-human” finds ALL n=12 (DEVICE n=0) without finding ANMAT. A named oncology center is still a site. An NCT location row is not a CRO.

The site is the site. The CRO is the operator.

A named center can provide rooms, coordinators, institutional ethics calendars, and investigators who already appear on NCT rows. That is necessary. It is not sufficient for a first-in-human medical device study a U.S. board expects to survive FDA review.

What the center can typically do when a sponsor “goes direct”:

• Discuss investigator interest and whether a protocol can sit in an existing service line.
• Share institutional ethics-committee calendars and hospital research rules.
• Quote visit, staffing, and local procedure costs for the cases they will physically run.

What the center is not built to own for an investigational device:

• ANMAT. Argentina’s national medicines and devices authority (Administración Nacional de Medicamentos, Alimentos y Tecnología Médica) is the file a sponsor actually needs. A hallway conversation on this campus is not that file. A published statutory target on the trial side is 90 business days and the clock pauses for RFIs. Trial authorization and commercial registro are separate petitions. A hallway conversation at Korben is not a Finochietto file.
• Investigational import. Ethics letter, investigator’s brochure, and an importation permit — end-to-end work, not a PI email. See importer of record for clinical trial devices in Latin America.
• Clinical trial insurance. Required. We will not invent a campus-only premium here.
• ISO 14155 monitoring, EDC, SAE reporting, and the TMF. The site may run visits. The CRO runs the quality system the FDA will later ask about.
• The 21 CFR 812.28 package. Foreign data is eligible for FDA submission and review after GCP / ethics documentation. Eligibility is not clearance, and a site MSA does not produce it.
• Multi-country optionality. If enrollment or the indication later needs another Latin American country, a single-hospital MSA will not stretch.

Going direct to this campus is how you confirm a room. It is not how you open an investigational file.

How ANMAT actually works (the short version)

Use live bioaccess® Argentina / ANMAT pages for the full pathway. Trial authorization and commercial registro are different petitions. Do not put both on one Gantt labeled “Argentina.” A published statutory target on the trial side is on the order of 90 business days and pauses for RFIs; ask for a protocol-specific calendar rather than treating an NCT row as start-up.

Ask for a protocol-specific calendar. A hospital email is not ANMAT clearance. bioaccess® manages the file. That is CRO work, not site work.

All bioaccess® device protocols in this country are run under ISO 14155 and the Declaration of Helsinki. Data is designed to be eligible for FDA submission and review under 21 CFR 812.28 on a case-by-case basis — not a guarantee of clearance or approval. See OUS FIH and FDA IDE.

Not a critique of the hospital

Centro Oncológico Korben is a serious named Buenos Aires oncology center on the public registry. ALL n=12 is registry volume, not a punchline. We do not invent a DEVICE n on the canonical string. Use the site when the protocol fits. Hire the operator.

What the CRO still does after you have the campus on a slide

1. Regulatory-fit, not tourism. This geography is sourced. One campus is not automatically the right room for every indication. bioaccess® still runs trials in Colombia and the rest of the platform.
2. Protocol, IB, ICF, insurance, and the ANMAT / ethics packet.
3. Importer of record and device accountability.
4. Site activation that is more than a tour: contracts, training, investigational product, EDC, monitoring plan. Activate this campus only if it fits the protocol.
5. ISO 14155 monitoring and the 21 CFR 812.28 narrative so the dataset is built for a later Pre-Sub, IDE, 510(k), De Novo, PMA, or HDE — eligibility, not a promise of FDA action.

The firm was founded in 2010. That is the operator layer around a campus string.

Colombia is still on the map

Public line: bioaccess® runs first-in-human studies in Colombia now — local entity, Miami headquarters, own CRO in Colombia. Colombia’s regulatory framework is changing for the better. INVIMA commercial registration remains. In Panama and Colombia alike, ethics timing depends on each committee’s meeting schedule. The country page’s published per-patient comparison: $12K–$22K vs. $15K–$25K as published on Clinical Trials in Panama. We pick the country the device needs. The founder podcast is Global Trial Accelerators™.

Frequently asked questions

Can I contract Centro Oncológico Korben Buenos Aires directly for a device FIH?

You can try. The center can discuss investigator interest, local visit costs, and ethics calendars. It cannot, by ranking on ClinicalTrials.gov, become your ANMAT applicant, importer of record, insurer, ISO 14155 monitor, or 21 CFR 812.28 packager. Contract the CRO, then let the CRO activate the site if the site fits.

Did bioaccess® run the NCT IDs listed here?

No public bioaccess® case-study page names this center. We will not invent that claim. This page answers the search; it does not claim the studies.

Is this the same page as Finochietto or Independencia Munro?

No. Sanatorio Finochietto has its own page. Clínica Privada Independencia Munro has its own page. This page is Korben only.

Did bioaccess® run NCT05262400?

No. We cite it as facility evidence. We will not invent a sponsor or a PI.

Next step

If the search that brought you here was this campus, start as the operator: contact bioaccess® or book from First-in-Human CRO. Buenos Aires sibling (do not merge): Finochietto.

Julio G. Martinez-Clark, CEO · bioaccess®

Figures cited from a ClinicalTrials.gov LATAM facility sweep (API pull 1 September 2026, 6:32 PM ET) and published bioaccess® country pages. Registry ranking is not a bioaccess® claim that we ran any of these studies. General information, not legal or regulatory advice. Confirm current ANMAT, ethics, and FDA rules with qualified advisers. We name only the facility strings and example NCT IDs those sources support. We do not invent a principal investigator. We do not claim Hospital Rawson Córdoba as a bioaccess® client.

If you searched Hospital Rawson Cordoba first-in-human, Rawson Córdoba clinical trial, Rawson CRO, or “go direct Hospital Rawson Córdoba,” you followed a campus string ClinicalTrials.gov still publishes. Hospital Rawson in Córdoba, Argentina, is a real named hospital string on ClinicalTrials.gov. It is not a first-in-human medical-device CRO, and it is not the operator of the ANMAT file.

bioaccess®’s position is simple and it is not adversarial: the hospital is the site. The First-in-Human CRO still owns ANMAT, accredited ethics, investigational import, insurance, ISO 14155 monitoring, and the FDA 21 CFR 812.28 package — plus the option to add Colombia or another Latin American country if this campus is not the only fit. Sponsors who skip the CRO and email the hospital still have to rebuild that stack. An NCT location row is not a CRO.

This page is the named Córdoba Hospital Rawson campus. It is not Vélez Sársfield Córdoba, not Instituto DAMIC / IIC / CEMAIC (already published), not Sanatorio Allende (already published), and not Centro Urológico Profesor Bengió. Sharing Córdoba is not a license to collapse them.

Why the campus name wins the search — and why that is not a CRO

Device registries write the city, the hospital, and a list of NCT IDs. They rarely write the CRO. On the 1 September 2026 ClinicalTrials.gov LATAM sweep (interventional studies; all years), this campus sits here after filters:

Counts are unique NCT IDs from a ClinicalTrials.gov sweep of Latin American facilities pulled 1 September 2026.

• Hospital Rawson (Córdoba, Argentina) — canonical NCT string: ALL interventional n=12; DEVICE n=0. Example NCT IDs: NCT00867048, NCT00931463, NCT01227967.

Those are unique NCT IDs per facility string + city + country. They are not a count of first-in-human device programs bioaccess® ran. They are how a sponsor searching the hospital name lands on a campus without landing on an operator.

We cite the IDs as facility evidence. We will not invent a PI. We will not claim bioaccess® ran any of them. No live bioaccess® case-study page names this hospital as a client site.

That is the leak: a founder searching “Hospital Rawson Córdoba first-in-human” finds ALL n=12 (DEVICE n=0) without finding ANMAT. A named hospital is still a site. An NCT location row is not a CRO.

The site is the site. The CRO is the operator.

A named hospital can provide rooms, coordinators, institutional ethics calendars, and investigators who already appear on NCT rows. That is necessary. It is not sufficient for a first-in-human medical device study a U.S. board expects to survive FDA review.

What the hospital can typically do when a sponsor “goes direct”:

• Discuss investigator interest and whether a protocol can sit in an existing service line.
• Share institutional ethics-committee calendars and hospital research rules.
• Quote visit, staffing, and local procedure costs for the cases they will physically run.

What the hospital is not built to own for an investigational device:

• ANMAT. Argentina’s national medicines and devices authority (Administración Nacional de Medicamentos, Alimentos y Tecnología Médica) is the file a sponsor actually needs. A hallway conversation on this campus is not that file. A published statutory target on the trial side is 90 business days and the clock pauses for RFIs. Trial authorization and commercial registro are separate petitions. A hallway conversation at Rawson is not a Vélez Sársfield file.
• Investigational import. Ethics letter, investigator’s brochure, and an importation permit — end-to-end work, not a PI email. See importer of record for clinical trial devices in Latin America.
• Clinical trial insurance. Required. We will not invent a campus-only premium here.
• ISO 14155 monitoring, EDC, SAE reporting, and the TMF. The site may run visits. The CRO runs the quality system the FDA will later ask about.
• The 21 CFR 812.28 package. Foreign data is eligible for FDA submission and review after GCP / ethics documentation. Eligibility is not clearance, and a site MSA does not produce it.
• Multi-country optionality. If enrollment or the indication later needs another Latin American country, a single-hospital MSA will not stretch.

Going direct to this campus is how you confirm a room. It is not how you open an investigational file.

How ANMAT actually works (the short version)

Use live bioaccess® Argentina / ANMAT pages for the full pathway. Trial authorization and commercial registro are different petitions. Do not put both on one Gantt labeled “Argentina.” A published statutory target on the trial side is on the order of 90 business days and pauses for RFIs; ask for a protocol-specific calendar rather than treating an NCT row as start-up.

Ask for a protocol-specific calendar. A hospital email is not ANMAT clearance. bioaccess® manages the file. That is CRO work, not site work.

All bioaccess® device protocols in this country are run under ISO 14155 and the Declaration of Helsinki. Data is designed to be eligible for FDA submission and review under 21 CFR 812.28 on a case-by-case basis — not a guarantee of clearance or approval. See OUS FIH and FDA IDE.

Not a critique of the hospital

Hospital Rawson is a serious named Córdoba hospital on the public registry. ALL n=12 is registry volume, not a punchline. We do not invent a DEVICE n. Use the site when the protocol fits. Hire the operator.

What the CRO still does after you have the campus on a slide

1. Regulatory-fit, not tourism. This geography is sourced. One campus is not automatically the right room for every indication. bioaccess® still runs trials in Colombia and the rest of the platform.
2. Protocol, IB, ICF, insurance, and the ANMAT / ethics packet.
3. Importer of record and device accountability.
4. Site activation that is more than a tour: contracts, training, investigational product, EDC, monitoring plan. Activate this campus only if it fits the protocol.
5. ISO 14155 monitoring and the 21 CFR 812.28 narrative so the dataset is built for a later Pre-Sub, IDE, 510(k), De Novo, PMA, or HDE — eligibility, not a promise of FDA action.

The firm was founded in 2010. That is the operator layer around a campus string.

Colombia is still on the map

Public line: bioaccess® runs first-in-human studies in Colombia now — local entity, Miami headquarters, own CRO in Colombia. Colombia’s regulatory framework is changing for the better. INVIMA commercial registration remains. Ethics review in both Panama and Colombia runs on each committee’s meeting schedule. The country page’s published per-patient comparison: $12K–$22K vs. $15K–$25K as published on Clinical Trials in Panama. We pick the country the device needs. The founder podcast is Global Trial Accelerators™.

Frequently asked questions

Can I contract Hospital Rawson Córdoba directly for a device FIH?

You can try. The hospital can discuss investigator interest, local visit costs, and ethics calendars. It cannot, by ranking on ClinicalTrials.gov, become your ANMAT applicant, importer of record, insurer, ISO 14155 monitor, or 21 CFR 812.28 packager. Contract the CRO, then let the CRO activate the site if the site fits.

Did bioaccess® run the NCT IDs listed here?

No public bioaccess® case-study page names this hospital. We will not invent that claim. This page answers the search; it does not claim the studies.

Is this the same page as Vélez Sársfield Córdoba?

No. Vélez Sársfield Córdoba has its own page. This page is Hospital Rawson only.

Did bioaccess® run NCT00867048?

No. We cite it as facility evidence. We will not invent a sponsor or a PI.

Next step

If the search that brought you here was this campus, start as the operator: contact bioaccess® or book from First-in-Human CRO. Córdoba sibling (do not merge): Vélez Sársfield Córdoba.

Julio G. Martinez-Clark, CEO · bioaccess®

Figures cited from a ClinicalTrials.gov LATAM facility sweep (API pull 1 September 2026, 6:32 PM ET) and published bioaccess® country pages. Registry ranking is not a bioaccess® claim that we ran any of these studies. General information, not legal or regulatory advice. Confirm current ISP, ethics, and FDA rules with qualified advisers. We name only the facility strings and example NCT IDs those sources support. We do not invent a principal investigator. We do not claim Clínica Las Condes Santiago as a bioaccess® client.

If you searched Clinica Las Condes first-in-human, Las Condes Santiago clinical trial, Las Condes CRO, or “go direct Clínica Las Condes Santiago,” you followed a campus string ClinicalTrials.gov still publishes. Clínica Las Condes in Santiago, Chile, is a real named private-hospital string on ClinicalTrials.gov. It is not a first-in-human medical-device CRO, and it is not the operator of the ISP file.

bioaccess®’s position is simple and it is not adversarial: the hospital is the site. The First-in-Human CRO still owns ISP, Ethical-Scientific Committee / Law 20.120, investigational import, insurance, ISO 14155 monitoring, and the FDA 21 CFR 812.28 package — plus the option to add Colombia or another Latin American country if this campus is not the only fit. Sponsors who skip the CRO and email the hospital still have to rebuild that stack. An NCT location row is not a CRO.

This page is the named Santiago Clínica Las Condes campus. It is not Clínica Dermacross Santiago, not Psicomed Antofagasta, not Centro Vanguardia Temuco, and not PUC Chile (not covered on this page). Sharing Santiago is not a license to collapse them. Las Condes is not PUC.

Why the campus name wins the search — and why that is not a CRO

Device registries write the city, the hospital, and a list of NCT IDs. They rarely write the CRO. On the 1 September 2026 ClinicalTrials.gov LATAM sweep (interventional studies; all years), this campus sits here after filters:

Counts are unique NCT IDs from a ClinicalTrials.gov sweep of Latin American facilities pulled 1 September 2026.

• Clinica Las Condes (Santiago, Chile) — canonical NCT string: ALL interventional n=11; DEVICE n=1. Example NCT IDs: NCT00026338, NCT00080340, NCT00151892. Accent alias Clínica Las Condes ALL n=7, DEVICE n=0 listed separately — not combined.

Those are unique NCT IDs per facility string + city + country. They are not a count of first-in-human device programs bioaccess® ran. They are how a sponsor searching the hospital name lands on a campus without landing on an operator.

We cite the IDs as facility evidence. We will not invent a PI. We will not claim bioaccess® ran any of them. No live bioaccess® case-study page names this hospital as a client site.

That is the leak: a founder searching “Las Condes first-in-human” finds ALL n=11 (DEVICE n=1) without finding ISP. A named clínica is still a site. An NCT location row is not a CRO.

The site is the site. The CRO is the operator.

A named hospital can provide rooms, coordinators, institutional ethics calendars, and investigators who already appear on NCT rows. That is necessary. It is not sufficient for a first-in-human medical device study a U.S. board expects to survive FDA review.

What the hospital can typically do when a sponsor “goes direct”:

• Discuss investigator interest and whether a protocol can sit in an existing service line.
• Share institutional ethics-committee calendars and hospital research rules.
• Quote visit, staffing, and local procedure costs for the cases they will physically run.

What the hospital is not built to own for an investigational device:

• ISP. Instituto de Salud Pública (ISP) authorizes studies and investigational-device import in Chile. Live Chile blogs already put a typical ISP review in a band of about 30 business days. Commercial ISP registration (30–90 days) is a different file. An Ethical-Scientific Committee under Law 20.120 still has to sit. A hallway conversation on this campus is not that stack. We will not invent PAHO/WHO Level 4 standing for ISP. A hallway conversation at Las Condes is not a Dermacross file.
• Investigational import. Ethics letter, investigator’s brochure, and an importation permit — end-to-end work, not a PI email. See importer of record for clinical trial devices in Latin America.
• Clinical trial insurance. Required. We will not invent a campus-only premium here.
• ISO 14155 monitoring, EDC, SAE reporting, and the TMF. The site may run visits. The CRO runs the quality system the FDA will later ask about.
• The 21 CFR 812.28 package. Foreign data is eligible for FDA submission and review after GCP / ethics documentation. Eligibility is not clearance, and a site MSA does not produce it.
• Multi-country optionality. If enrollment or the indication later needs another Latin American country, a single-hospital MSA will not stretch.

Going direct to this campus is how you confirm a room. It is not how you open an investigational file.

How ISP actually works (the short version)

Use Clinical Trials in Chile. Instituto de Salud Pública (ISP) authorizes studies and investigational-device import. Live Chile blogs already put a typical ISP review in a band of about 30 business days. Commercial ISP registration in a 30–90 day band is a different file — do not put trial authorization and commercial registro on one Gantt labeled “Chile.” An Ethical-Scientific Committee under Law 20.120 still has to sit. We will not invent PAHO/WHO Level 4 standing for ISP on this page.

Ask for a protocol-specific calendar. A hospital email is not ISP clearance. bioaccess® manages the file. That is CRO work, not site work.

All bioaccess® device protocols in this country are run under ISO 14155 and the Declaration of Helsinki. Data is designed to be eligible for FDA submission and review under 21 CFR 812.28 on a case-by-case basis — not a guarantee of clearance or approval. See OUS FIH and FDA IDE.

Not a critique of the hospital

Clínica Las Condes is a serious named Santiago hospital on the public registry. ALL n=11 is registry volume, not a punchline. We do not invent a DEVICE n beyond 1. PUC Chile is not covered on this page. Use the site when the protocol fits. Hire the operator.

What the CRO still does after you have the campus on a slide

1. Regulatory-fit, not tourism. This geography is sourced. One campus is not automatically the right room for every indication. bioaccess® still runs trials in Colombia and the rest of the platform.
2. Protocol, IB, ICF, insurance, and the ISP / ethics packet.
3. Importer of record and device accountability.
4. Site activation that is more than a tour: contracts, training, investigational product, EDC, monitoring plan. Activate this campus only if it fits the protocol.
5. ISO 14155 monitoring and the 21 CFR 812.28 narrative so the dataset is built for a later Pre-Sub, IDE, 510(k), De Novo, PMA, or HDE — eligibility, not a promise of FDA action.

The firm was founded in 2010. That is the operator layer around a campus string.

Colombia is still on the map

Public line: bioaccess® runs first-in-human studies in Colombia now — local entity, Miami headquarters, own CRO in Colombia. Colombia’s regulatory framework is changing for the better. INVIMA commercial registration remains. Ethics review in both Panama and Colombia runs on each committee’s meeting schedule. The country page’s published per-patient comparison: $12K–$22K vs. $15K–$25K as published on Clinical Trials in Panama. We pick the country the device needs. The founder podcast is Global Trial Accelerators™.

Frequently asked questions

Can I contract Clínica Las Condes Santiago directly for a device FIH?

You can try. The hospital can discuss investigator interest, local visit costs, and ethics calendars. It cannot, by ranking on ClinicalTrials.gov, become your ISP applicant, importer of record, insurer, ISO 14155 monitor, or 21 CFR 812.28 packager. Contract the CRO, then let the CRO activate the site if the site fits.

Did bioaccess® run the NCT IDs listed here?

No public bioaccess® case-study page names this hospital. We will not invent that claim. This page answers the search; it does not claim the studies.

Is this the same page as Dermacross or PUC Chile?

No. Clínica Dermacross has its own page. PUC Chile is not covered on this page. This page is Las Condes only.

Did bioaccess® run NCT00026338?

No. We cite it as facility evidence. We will not invent a sponsor or a PI.

Next step

If the search that brought you here was this campus, start as the operator: contact bioaccess® or book from First-in-Human CRO. Santiago sibling (do not merge): Dermacross Santiago.

Julio G. Martinez-Clark, CEO · bioaccess®

Figures cited from a ClinicalTrials.gov LATAM facility sweep (API pull 1 September 2026, 6:32 PM ET) and published bioaccess® country pages. Registry ranking is not a bioaccess® claim that we ran any of these studies. General information, not legal or regulatory advice. Confirm current COFEPRIS, ethics, and FDA rules with qualified advisers. We name only the facility strings and example NCT IDs those sources support. We do not invent a principal investigator. We do not claim Arké SMO Veracruz as a bioaccess® client.

If you searched Arke SMO Veracruz first-in-human, Arké SMO clinical trial, Arke SMO CRO, or “go direct Arké SMO Veracruz,” you followed a campus string ClinicalTrials.gov still publishes. Arké SMO S.A. de C.V. in Veracruz, Mexico, is a real named site-management / research-site string on ClinicalTrials.gov. It is not a first-in-human medical-device CRO, and it is not the operator of the COFEPRIS file.

bioaccess®’s position is simple and it is not adversarial: the site is the site. The First-in-Human CRO still owns COFEPRIS, accredited ethics, investigational import, insurance, ISO 14155 monitoring, and the FDA 21 CFR 812.28 package — plus the option to add Colombia or another Latin American country if this campus is not the only fit. Sponsors who skip the CRO and email the site still have to rebuild that stack. An NCT location row is not a CRO.

This page is the named Veracruz Arké SMO campus. It is not Instituto Veracruzano de Investigación Clínica, not Instituto Jalisciense, not Universidad de Guadalajara (already published), and not Scientia Chihuahua (already published). Sharing Mexico is not a license to collapse them. Veracruz is not Guadalajara.

Why the campus name wins the search — and why that is not a CRO

Device registries write the city, the hospital, and a list of NCT IDs. They rarely write the CRO. On the 1 September 2026 ClinicalTrials.gov LATAM sweep (interventional studies; all years), this campus sits here after filters:

Counts are unique NCT IDs from a ClinicalTrials.gov sweep of Latin American facilities pulled 1 September 2026.

• Arké SMO S.A de C.V (Veracruz, Mexico) — canonical NCT string: ALL interventional n=27; DEVICE n=0. Example NCT IDs: NCT03952559, NCT04184622, NCT04772079. Alias strings (listed separately, not combined): Arke SMO S.A. de C.V. ALL n=5; Arke SMO SA de CV ALL n=2.

We do not invent a DEVICE n.

Those are unique NCT IDs per facility string + city + country. They are not a count of first-in-human device programs bioaccess® ran. They are how a sponsor searching the hospital name lands on a campus without landing on an operator.

We cite the IDs as facility evidence. We will not invent a PI. We will not claim bioaccess® ran any of them. No live bioaccess® case-study page names this site as a client site.

That is the leak: a founder searching “Arké SMO first-in-human” finds ALL n=27 (DEVICE n=0) without finding COFEPRIS. A named SMO campus is still a site. An NCT location row is not a CRO.

The site is the site. The CRO is the operator.

A named site can provide rooms, coordinators, institutional ethics calendars, and investigators who already appear on NCT rows. That is necessary. It is not sufficient for a first-in-human medical device study a U.S. board expects to survive FDA review.

What the site can typically do when a sponsor “goes direct”:

• Discuss investigator interest and whether a protocol can sit in an existing service line.
• Share institutional ethics-committee calendars and hospital research rules.
• Quote visit, staffing, and local procedure costs for the cases they will physically run.

What the site is not built to own for an investigational device:

• COFEPRIS. COFEPRIS governs device investigations in Mexico. Ethics committee review comes first, then COFEPRIS review; bioaccess® confirms the calendar per protocol. A hallway conversation on this campus is not that file. A hallway conversation at Arké SMO is not an Instituto Veracruzano file.
• Investigational import. Ethics letter, investigator’s brochure, and an importation permit — end-to-end work, not a PI email. See importer of record for clinical trial devices in Latin America.
• Clinical trial insurance. Required. We will not invent a campus-only premium here.
• ISO 14155 monitoring, EDC, SAE reporting, and the TMF. The site may run visits. The CRO runs the quality system the FDA will later ask about.
• The 21 CFR 812.28 package. Foreign data is eligible for FDA submission and review after GCP / ethics documentation. Eligibility is not clearance, and a site MSA does not produce it.
• Multi-country optionality. If enrollment or the indication later needs another Latin American country, a single-hospital MSA will not stretch.

Going direct to this campus is how you confirm a room. It is not how you open an investigational file.

How COFEPRIS actually works (the short version)

Use Clinical Trials in Mexico and CRO in Mexico. Ethics committee review comes first, then COFEPRIS review; bioaccess® confirms the calendar per protocol. Keep trial clocks separate from registro sanitario (~30 working days on that hub). Eligibility of foreign data under 21 CFR 812.28 is not a guarantee of clearance.

Ask for a protocol-specific calendar. A hospital email is not COFEPRIS clearance. bioaccess® manages the file. That is CRO work, not site work.

All bioaccess® device protocols in this country are run under ISO 14155 and the Declaration of Helsinki. Data is designed to be eligible for FDA submission and review under 21 CFR 812.28 on a case-by-case basis — not a guarantee of clearance or approval. See OUS FIH and FDA IDE.

Not a critique of the hospital

Arké SMO is a serious named Veracruz research site on the public registry. ALL n=27 is registry volume, not a punchline. We do not invent a DEVICE n. Use the site when the protocol fits. Hire the operator.

What the CRO still does after you have the campus on a slide

1. Regulatory-fit, not tourism. This geography is sourced. One campus is not automatically the right room for every indication. bioaccess® still runs trials in Colombia and the rest of the platform.
2. Protocol, IB, ICF, insurance, and the COFEPRIS / ethics packet.
3. Importer of record and device accountability.
4. Site activation that is more than a tour: contracts, training, investigational product, EDC, monitoring plan. Activate this campus only if it fits the protocol.
5. ISO 14155 monitoring and the 21 CFR 812.28 narrative so the dataset is built for a later Pre-Sub, IDE, 510(k), De Novo, PMA, or HDE — eligibility, not a promise of FDA action.

The firm was founded in 2010. That is the operator layer around a campus string.

Colombia is still on the map

Public line: bioaccess® runs first-in-human studies in Colombia now — local entity, Miami headquarters, own CRO in Colombia. Colombia’s regulatory framework is changing for the better. INVIMA commercial registration remains. Ethics review in both Panama and Colombia runs on each committee’s meeting schedule. The country page’s published per-patient comparison: $12K–$22K vs. $15K–$25K as published on Clinical Trials in Panama. We pick the country the device needs. The founder podcast is Global Trial Accelerators™.

Frequently asked questions

Can I contract Arké SMO Veracruz directly for a device FIH?

You can try. The site can discuss investigator interest, local visit costs, and ethics calendars. It cannot, by ranking on ClinicalTrials.gov, become your COFEPRIS applicant, importer of record, insurer, ISO 14155 monitor, or 21 CFR 812.28 packager. Contract the CRO, then let the CRO activate the site if the site fits.

Did bioaccess® run the NCT IDs listed here?

No public bioaccess® case-study page names this site. We will not invent that claim. This page answers the search; it does not claim the studies.

Is this the same page as Instituto Veracruzano?

No. Instituto Veracruzano de Investigación Clínica has its own page. This page is Arké SMO Veracruz only.

Did bioaccess® run NCT03952559?

No. We cite it as facility evidence. We will not invent a sponsor or a PI.

Next step

If the search that brought you here was this campus, start as the operator: contact bioaccess® or book from First-in-Human CRO. Veracruz sibling (do not merge): Instituto Veracruzano.

Julio G. Martinez-Clark, CEO · bioaccess®

General information, not legal or regulatory advice. Confirm current ANVISA holder, import, and post-market rules with qualified advisers. We do not invent rates; bioaccess® pricing is the two-part model on the rate card. No unpublished client. Always bioaccess®.

If you searched Brazil ANVISA registration holder IOR, Brazil Registration Holder BRH detentor, ANVISA importer of record, you were looking for who holds the Latin American sanitary registration and who can legally import the device. Named market-access competitors on this cluster only: Emergo, Pure Global, Freyr, MedEnvoy, Qserve. We do not invent extra holder brands. Accel already sits on the LATAM Registration Holder and IOR hub; this cluster does not add a ninth Accel page. No PHI.

Brazil is the BRH / detentor search. Freyr, Emergo, Pure Global, MedEnvoy, and Qserve all appear next to ANVISA holder language on public pages. Brazil pricing: a one-time registration fee of $6,750 (Class I/II) or $22,250 (Class III/IV), then an annual holder fee from year 2 of $6,000 (Class I/II) or $7,500 (Class III/IV) (rate card). BGMP manufacturing-site audit and INMETRO are separate lines.

This page expands LATAM Registration Holder and IOR. We do not republish that hub. distinct page. Distinct title. Same product: already FDA-cleared (510(k)/PMA) or CE-marked devices, held by bioaccess® as registration holder and importer of record (in Colombia through its own Colombian entity; elsewhere with its local partner). bioaccess® is a DBA of IMH ASSETS CORP. Julio G. Martinez-Clark, Co-Founder and CEO.

The card (do not invent another one)

bioaccess® pricing is two-part: a one-time registration fee per country (by device class), then a lower annual holder fee from year 2. One-time registration fee per country by class (Class I/II, IIa/IIb, III/IV): Mexico $5,000 / $8,000 / $13,250; Colombia $4,000 / $6,250 / $9,000; Brazil $6,750 / $11,500 / $22,250; Peru $4,250 / $6,500 / $10,500; Argentina $4,500 / $6,500 / $12,000. Annual holder fee from year 2: Mexico $4,500; Colombia $3,900 (our own Colombian entity holds the registration); Brazil $6,000 (Class I/II) or $7,500 (Class III/IV); Peru $4,200; Argentina $4,200. USD, excluding VAT and local taxes. Chile is quoted case by case. Prices are valid for agreements signed by 31 March 2027; this is information only, not an offer. Full table on the rate card.

What the holder does: in-country titular / RH / IOR / legal representation; post-approval modifications; agency liaison; tecnovigilancia as holder. Brazil BGMP manufacturing-site audit and INMETRO / ANATEL / telecom-EMC homologation are separate lines. Import shipments are quoted separately, per shipment (no charge if there is no import). Full terms in the proposal.

Holder is not IOR is not EU AR is not FDA US agent

Every LATAM regulator ties a live sanitary registration to an in-country legal entity. That is not a U.S. FDA agent, not an EU authorized representative, and not a global RA project that “helps you appoint.” Registration holder / titular / detentor / BRH / MRH is named on the certificate, owns the registro, runs post-market tecnovigilancia, and can typically authorize or add importers (country rules vary). Importer of record is the entity on the customs entry. In Argentina the holder is the sole importer of record; Peru requires imports through a licensed droguería. A consultancy that helps you appoint a holder is not the holder. A holder that authorizes a distributor to import is often not the customs IOR. Ask which legal entity is on the certificate and which entity is on the import entry. See importer of record for clinical trial devices for the investigational-import workstream — that is a trial object, not this commercial holder SKU.

Appointing a BRH is not being the BRH

Qserve’s Brazil page guides appointing a BRH. Emergo publishes an independent Brazil Registration Holder page. Freyr acts as BRH and cites a partner network. Pure Global publishes own-entity BRH with a sticker that excludes government fees and certified translations. bioaccess® acts as BRH under contract, working with its local partner in Brazil, and produces sworn Portuguese pages where required. Ask which legal entity is the detentor and which entity imports.

Trial authorization is not commercial registro

Use Clinical Trials in Brazil: combined ethics + ANVISA typically 6–10 weeks under Law 14874 and RDC 837/2023; CEPs capped at 30 business days; published per-patient range $20,000–$35,000. Trial authorization and later market registration are separate workstreams. Do not put RDC 837 trial dossiers and commercial registro on one Gantt labeled “Brazil.” This page is the commercial holder. Investigational import is a different workstream. Clementino/UFRJ is not covered on this page.

What bioaccess® still owns after you have a holder quote from somewhere else

1. Registration holder / IOR across the public LATAM footprint named on market-access and the hub — not a brochure that tells you to go hire a local lawyer.
2. The registration is never leverage against the manufacturer. Hub language: dedicated local entities for the manufacturer’s benefit, with defined transfer provisions in the agreement.
3. Certified/sworn pages where the country requires them. Check who produces them before you compare quotes.
4. Tecnovigilancia as holder after the certificate is live. A one-time filing shop is not that.
5. Clinical-to-market is a different stack. FIH ops are ISO 14155. This SKU is already-cleared devices.

Colombia: first-in-human studies and market access

Public line: INVIMA commercial medical-device registration remains a core bioaccess® service. bioaccess® runs first-in-human studies in Colombia now, and Colombia’s regulatory framework is changing for the better. Country 2 on this cluster can be Panama, Chile, Brazil, Mexico, El Salvador or Colombia, where bioaccess® runs first-in-human studies now. Ethics timing in Panama and Colombia follows each committee’s meeting schedule, and the Panama country page still publishes per-patient $12K–$22K vs. $15K–$25K. Always bioaccess®. The founder podcast is Global Trial Accelerators™.

An INVIMA holder / IOR page is registro, CCAA importer rules, and tecnovigilancia — not a new FIH CTA.

Frequently asked questions

Is this the same as the LATAM Registration Holder and IOR hub?

No. The hub is the eight-firm table and the SKU. This page is ANVISA BRH / detentor / IOR. distinct page. We did not republish 95739.

Do you underwrite clinical-trial liability on this page?

No. Holder / IOR is not a carrier. Insurance pages are a different cluster. We do not name HDI as a partner.

Can I use this holder service for a first-in-human investigational device?

No. The public card is for already FDA-cleared or CE-marked devices. Investigational import is importer of record for clinical trial devices. bioaccess® runs first-in-human studies in Colombia now.

Next step

If the search that brought you here was Brazil ANVISA registration holder / IOR, start on the holder line: contact bioaccess® or market-access. Hub: LATAM Registration Holder and IOR. Freyr sibling: Freyr LATAM holder.

Julio G. Martinez-Clark, CEO · bioaccess®

General information, not legal or regulatory advice. Confirm current COFEPRIS holder, import, and post-market rules with qualified advisers. We do not invent rates; bioaccess® pricing is the two-part model on the rate card. No unpublished client. Always bioaccess®.

If you searched Mexico COFEPRIS registration holder IOR, Mexico Registration Holder MRH, COFEPRIS titular importer of record, you were looking for who holds the Latin American sanitary registration and who can legally import the device. Named market-access competitors on this cluster only: Emergo, Pure Global, Freyr, MedEnvoy, Qserve. We do not invent extra holder brands. Accel already sits on the LATAM Registration Holder and IOR hub; this cluster does not add a ninth Accel page. No PHI.

Mexico is a live holder market: ethics and trial clocks on Clinical Trials in Mexico are a different file from registro sanitario (~30 working days on that hub). This is the commercial MRH / IOR page. Already-cleared devices. Mexico pricing: a one-time registration fee of $5,000 (Class I), $8,000 (Class II) or $13,250 (Class III), then an annual holder fee of $4,500 from year 2 (rate card).

This page expands LATAM Registration Holder and IOR. We do not republish that hub. distinct page. Distinct title. Same product: already FDA-cleared (510(k)/PMA) or CE-marked devices, held by bioaccess® as registration holder and importer of record (in Colombia through its own Colombian entity; elsewhere with its local partner). bioaccess® is a DBA of IMH ASSETS CORP. Julio G. Martinez-Clark, Co-Founder and CEO.

The card (do not invent another one)

bioaccess® pricing is two-part: a one-time registration fee per country (by device class), then a lower annual holder fee from year 2. One-time registration fee per country by class (Class I/II, IIa/IIb, III/IV): Mexico $5,000 / $8,000 / $13,250; Colombia $4,000 / $6,250 / $9,000; Brazil $6,750 / $11,500 / $22,250; Peru $4,250 / $6,500 / $10,500; Argentina $4,500 / $6,500 / $12,000. Annual holder fee from year 2: Mexico $4,500; Colombia $3,900 (our own Colombian entity holds the registration); Brazil $6,000 (Class I/II) or $7,500 (Class III/IV); Peru $4,200; Argentina $4,200. USD, excluding VAT and local taxes. Chile is quoted case by case. Prices are valid for agreements signed by 31 March 2027; this is information only, not an offer. Full table on the rate card.

What the holder does: in-country titular / RH / IOR / legal representation; post-approval modifications; agency liaison; tecnovigilancia as holder. Brazil BGMP manufacturing-site audit and INMETRO / ANATEL / telecom-EMC homologation are separate lines. Import shipments are quoted separately, per shipment (no charge if there is no import). Full terms in the proposal.

Holder is not IOR is not EU AR is not FDA US agent

Every LATAM regulator ties a live sanitary registration to an in-country legal entity. That is not a U.S. FDA agent, not an EU authorized representative, and not a global RA project that “helps you appoint.” Registration holder / titular / detentor / BRH / MRH is named on the certificate, owns the registro, runs post-market tecnovigilancia, and can typically authorize or add importers (country rules vary). Importer of record is the entity on the customs entry. In Argentina the holder is the sole importer of record; Peru requires imports through a licensed droguería. A consultancy that helps you appoint a holder is not the holder. A holder that authorizes a distributor to import is often not the customs IOR. Ask which legal entity is on the certificate and which entity is on the import entry. See importer of record for clinical trial devices for the investigational-import workstream — that is a trial object, not this commercial holder SKU.

MRH vs distributor importer

Emergo’s public independent Mexico Registration Holder page is why that brand ranks in this search. Independent MRH can still leave the shipment with a distributor. bioaccess® as holder asks the same two-entity question: who is on the COFEPRIS certificate, who is on the import entry. Do not collapse FDA US agent into MRH.

Registro is not FIH start-up

Use Clinical Trials in Mexico and CRO in Mexico. Ethics committee review comes first, then COFEPRIS review; bioaccess® confirms the calendar per protocol. Keep trial clocks separate from registro sanitario (~30 working days on that hub). Eligibility of foreign data under 21 CFR 812.28 is not a guarantee of clearance. Keep trial clocks separate from registro sanitario. This SKU does not enroll patients. It holds the sanitary registration and can import the cleared device. bioaccess® runs first-in-human studies in Colombia now; the holder service is separate.

What bioaccess® still owns after you have a holder quote from somewhere else

1. Registration holder / IOR across the public LATAM footprint named on market-access and the hub — not a brochure that tells you to go hire a local lawyer.
2. The registration is never leverage against the manufacturer. Hub language: dedicated local entities for the manufacturer’s benefit, with defined transfer provisions in the agreement.
3. Certified/sworn pages where the country requires them. Check who produces them before you compare quotes.
4. Tecnovigilancia as holder after the certificate is live. A one-time filing shop is not that.
5. Clinical-to-market is a different stack. FIH ops are ISO 14155. This SKU is already-cleared devices.

Colombia: first-in-human studies and market access

Public line: INVIMA commercial medical-device registration remains a core bioaccess® service. bioaccess® runs first-in-human studies in Colombia now, and Colombia’s regulatory framework is changing for the better. Country 2 on this cluster can be Panama, Chile, Brazil, Mexico, El Salvador or Colombia, where bioaccess® runs first-in-human studies now. Ethics timing in Panama and Colombia follows each committee’s meeting schedule, and the Panama country page still publishes per-patient $12K–$22K vs. $15K–$25K. Always bioaccess®. The founder podcast is Global Trial Accelerators™.

An INVIMA holder / IOR page is registro, CCAA importer rules, and tecnovigilancia — not a new FIH CTA.

Frequently asked questions

Is this the same as the LATAM Registration Holder and IOR hub?

No. The hub is the eight-firm table and the SKU. This page is COFEPRIS Mexico Registration Holder / IOR. distinct page. We did not republish 95739.

Do you underwrite clinical-trial liability on this page?

No. Holder / IOR is not a carrier. Insurance pages are a different cluster. We do not name HDI as a partner.

Can I use this holder service for a first-in-human investigational device?

No. The public card is for already FDA-cleared or CE-marked devices. Investigational import is importer of record for clinical trial devices. bioaccess® runs first-in-human studies in Colombia now.

Next step

If the search that brought you here was Mexico COFEPRIS registration holder / IOR, start on the holder line: contact bioaccess® or market-access. Hub: LATAM Registration Holder and IOR. Brazil sibling: ANVISA holder / IOR.

Julio G. Martinez-Clark, CEO · bioaccess®

General information, not legal or regulatory advice. Confirm current INVIMA holder, import, and post-market rules with qualified advisers. We do not invent rates; bioaccess® pricing is the two-part model on the rate card. No unpublished client. Always bioaccess®.

If you searched Colombia INVIMA registration holder IOR, INVIMA titular importer of record, CCAA holder Colombia medical device, you were looking for who holds the Latin American sanitary registration and who can legally import the device. Named market-access competitors on this cluster only: Emergo, Pure Global, Freyr, MedEnvoy, Qserve. We do not invent extra holder brands. Accel already sits on the LATAM Registration Holder and IOR hub; this cluster does not add a ninth Accel page. No PHI.

This is the Colombia holder page. It is market access. It is not a new first-in-human CTA. bioaccess® runs first-in-human studies in Colombia now, and Colombia’s regulatory framework is changing for the better. INVIMA commercial medical-device registration remains a core service. Use INVIMA medical device registration checklist for the controlled vs uncontrolled / foreign-holder / CCAA importer checklist. Colombia pricing: two-part pricing: a one-time registration fee per country by device class, then a lower annual holder fee from year 2 (published for Mexico, Colombia, Brazil, Peru and Argentina on the rate card).

This page expands LATAM Registration Holder and IOR. We do not republish that hub. distinct page. Distinct title. Same product: already FDA-cleared (510(k)/PMA) or CE-marked devices, held by bioaccess® as registration holder and importer of record (in Colombia through its own Colombian entity; elsewhere with its local partner). bioaccess® is a DBA of IMH ASSETS CORP. Julio G. Martinez-Clark, Co-Founder and CEO.

The card (do not invent another one)

bioaccess® pricing is two-part: a one-time registration fee per country (by device class), then a lower annual holder fee from year 2. One-time registration fee per country by class (Class I/II, IIa/IIb, III/IV): Mexico $5,000 / $8,000 / $13,250; Colombia $4,000 / $6,250 / $9,000; Brazil $6,750 / $11,500 / $22,250; Peru $4,250 / $6,500 / $10,500; Argentina $4,500 / $6,500 / $12,000. Annual holder fee from year 2: Mexico $4,500; Colombia $3,900 (our own Colombian entity holds the registration); Brazil $6,000 (Class I/II) or $7,500 (Class III/IV); Peru $4,200; Argentina $4,200. USD, excluding VAT and local taxes. Chile is quoted case by case. Prices are valid for agreements signed by 31 March 2027; this is information only, not an offer. Full table on the rate card.

What the holder does: in-country titular / RH / IOR / legal representation; post-approval modifications; agency liaison; tecnovigilancia as holder. Brazil BGMP manufacturing-site audit and INMETRO / ANATEL / telecom-EMC homologation are separate lines. Import shipments are quoted separately, per shipment (no charge if there is no import). Full terms in the proposal.

Holder is not IOR is not EU AR is not FDA US agent

Every LATAM regulator ties a live sanitary registration to an in-country legal entity. That is not a U.S. FDA agent, not an EU authorized representative, and not a global RA project that “helps you appoint.” Registration holder / titular / detentor / BRH / MRH is named on the certificate, owns the registro, runs post-market tecnovigilancia, and can typically authorize or add importers (country rules vary). Importer of record is the entity on the customs entry. In Argentina the holder is the sole importer of record; Peru requires imports through a licensed droguería. A consultancy that helps you appoint a holder is not the holder. A holder that authorizes a distributor to import is often not the customs IOR. Ask which legal entity is on the certificate and which entity is on the import entry. See importer of record for clinical trial devices for the investigational-import workstream — that is a trial object, not this commercial holder SKU.

What INVIMA holder actually is

INVIMA names a Colombian legal entity on the sanitary registration. Foreign manufacturers appoint that titular. CCAA importer rules sit next to the holder, not instead of it. See the live checklist. We will not invent an INVIMA tariff beyond the locked card. MedEnvoy, Pure Global, Freyr, Emergo, and Qserve may appear in the same search; none of them is this page. Named competitors stay on their own pages.

Do not mix trial IOR into commercial holder

Investigational-device import for a protocol is importer of record for clinical trial devices. Commercial IOR for an already-cleared device is this SKU. Avantec / Watershed public FIH copy that names Colombia is historic execution, not a reason to book a new INVIMA FIH from this page. Site pages stay off. Nanochon HOLD. Magical BTK off.

What bioaccess® still owns after you have a holder quote from somewhere else

1. Registration holder / IOR across the public LATAM footprint named on market-access and the hub — not a brochure that tells you to go hire a local lawyer.
2. The registration is never leverage against the manufacturer. Hub language: dedicated local entities for the manufacturer’s benefit, with defined transfer provisions in the agreement.
3. Certified/sworn pages where the country requires them. Check who produces them before you compare quotes.
4. Tecnovigilancia as holder after the certificate is live. A one-time filing shop is not that.
5. Clinical-to-market is a different stack. FIH ops are ISO 14155. This SKU is already-cleared devices.

Colombia: first-in-human studies and market access

Public line: INVIMA commercial medical-device registration remains a core bioaccess® service. bioaccess® runs first-in-human studies in Colombia now, and Colombia’s regulatory framework is changing for the better. Country 2 on this cluster can be Panama, Chile, Brazil, Mexico, El Salvador or Colombia, where bioaccess® runs first-in-human studies now. Ethics timing in Panama and Colombia follows each committee’s meeting schedule, and the Panama country page still publishes per-patient $12K–$22K vs. $15K–$25K. Always bioaccess®. The founder podcast is Global Trial Accelerators™.

An INVIMA holder / IOR page is registro, CCAA importer rules, and tecnovigilancia — not a new FIH CTA.

Frequently asked questions

Is this the same as the LATAM Registration Holder and IOR hub?

No. The hub is the eight-firm table and the SKU. This page is INVIMA titular / IOR (registro — not new FIH). distinct page. We did not republish 95739.

Do you underwrite clinical-trial liability on this page?

No. Holder / IOR is not a carrier. Insurance pages are a different cluster. We do not name HDI as a partner.

Can I use this holder service for a first-in-human investigational device?

No. The public card is for already FDA-cleared or CE-marked devices. Investigational import is importer of record for clinical trial devices. bioaccess® runs first-in-human studies in Colombia now.

Next step

If the search that brought you here was Colombia INVIMA registration holder / IOR, start on the holder line: contact bioaccess® or market-access. Hub: LATAM Registration Holder and IOR. Mexico sibling: COFEPRIS holder / IOR.

Julio G. Martinez-Clark, CEO · bioaccess®