If the FDA steps in to regulate laboratory-developed tests, it will slow down innovation, add costs to the development of the product, and likely decrease the number of tests that come out, but the public health benefits of increased oversight might be worth it, said Scott Gottlieb, MD, resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.
If the FDA steps in to regulate laboratory-developed tests, it will slow down innovation, add costs to the development of the product, and likely decrease the number of tests that come out, but the public health benefits of increased oversight might be worth it, said Scott Gottlieb, MD, resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.
Transcript (slightly modified)
The FDA has called for more regulation of laboratory-developed tests. Is more regulation needed or will it stifle innovation?
There's no question that if FDA steps in to regulate the laboratory-developed tests, it's going to slow down the pace of innovation and add costs to the development of those products. This tends to be a low-margin business to begin with—these diagnostic tests don't necessarily sell for big sums of money. So if you look at a lot of the diagnostic ventures, a lot of them aren't successful. It's a very hard business to get into. A lot of these laboratory-developed tests, it's a very consultative endeavor, it takes a lot of resources to get into that business.
So it's a low-margin business in many cases to begin with, with the exception of a handful of tests. There's no question that if FDA applies regulatory oversight, it's going to increase the costs and decrease the amount of investment that goes into this space and the number of tests that come out. The question is: will the public health benefits of having FDA provide oversight here outweigh that impact on innovation? And I think that's an open question.
There's probably a subset of tests that do merit increased regulation, perhaps by FDA, because they do meet the definition of being a medical device, particularly in multivariate tests. I think FDA could carve out that subset of tests and perhaps provide a regulatory touch. without trying to encompass the whole field, without trying to exert its regualtory reach across the entire space. But they talked in the past about just carving out the multivariate tests, but they seem to have backed away from that and now they want to regulate the entire space.
Overcoming Employment Barriers for Lasting Social Impact: Freedom House 2.0 and Pathways to Work
April 16th 2024To help celebrate and recognize National Minority Health Month, we are bringing you a special month-long podcast series with our Strategic Alliance Partner, UPMC Health Plan. Welcome to our second episode, in which we learn all about Freedom House 2.0 and the Pathways to Work program.
Listen
Beyond Insulin: The Impact of Next-Generation Diabetes Technology
April 17th 2024Experts explain how new diabetes technologies like continuous glucose monitors are transforming care beyond intensive insulin therapy, offering personalized insights and improving outcomes for patients of all treatment levels.
Read More
Making Giant Strides in Maternity Health Through Baby Steps
April 9th 2024To help celebrate and recognize National Minority Health Month, we are kicking off a special month-long podcast series with our strategic alliance partner, UPMC Health Plan. Welcome to our first episode, which is all about the Baby Steps Maternity Program and its mission to support women throughout every step of their pregnancy journey.
Listen
Dr Michael Farwell on FDG PET/CT Imaging to Predict Immunotherapy Response in Advanced Melanoma
April 15th 2024Michael Farwell, MD, associate professor of radiology at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, provides insights into a study on the benefits of using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET/CT imaging to detect metabolic tumor changes in skin cancer.
Read More