Point-Counterpoint: The FDA Has a Role in Regulation of Laboratory-Developed Tests

J Clin Microbiol. 2016 Apr;54(4):829-33. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00063-16. Epub 2016 Jan 20.

Abstract

Since the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released its draft guidance on the regulation of laboratory-developed tests (LDTs) in October 2014, there has been a flurry of responses from commercial and hospital-based laboratory directors, clinicians, professional organizations, and diagnostic companies. The FDA defines an LDT as an "in vitrodiagnostic device that is intended for clinical use and is designed, manufactured, and used within a single laboratory." The draft guidance outlines a risk-based approach, with oversight of high-risk and moderate-risk tests being phased in over 9 years. High-risk tests would be regulated first and require premarket approval. Subsequently, moderate-risk tests would require a 510(k) premarket submission to the FDA and low-risk tests would need only to be registered. Oversight discretion would be exercised for LDTs focused on rare diseases (defined as fewer than 4,000 tests, not cases, per year nationally) and unmet clinical needs (defined as those tests for which there is no alternative FDA-cleared or -approved test). There was an open comment period followed by a public hearing in early January of 2015, and we are currently awaiting the final decision regarding the regulation of LDTs. Given that LDTs have been developed by many laboratories and are essential for the diagnosis and monitoring of an array of infectious diseases, changes in their regulation will have far-reaching implications for clinical microbiology laboratories. In this Point-Counterpoint, Angela Caliendo discusses the potential benefits of the FDA guidance for LDTs whereas Kim Hanson discusses the concerns associated with implementing the guidance and why these regulations may not improve clinical care.

MeSH terms

  • Animals
  • Communicable Diseases / diagnosis*
  • Diagnostic Tests, Routine / standards*
  • Guidelines as Topic
  • Humans
  • United States
  • United States Food and Drug Administration

Grants and funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.