The DTC microbiome testing industry needs more regulation

Diane E Hoffmann,Erik C von Rosenvinge,Mary-Claire Roghmann,Francis B Palumbo,Daniel McDonald,Jacques Ravel,Diane E. Hoffmann,Erik C. von Rosenvinge,Francis B. Palumbo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adk4271

IF: 56.9

2024-03-15

Science

Abstract:Tests lack analytical and clinical validity, requiring more federal oversight to prevent consumer harm

multidisciplinary sciences

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Evaluating the Analytical Performance of Direct-to-Consumer Gut Microbiome Testing Services

Stephanie L. Servetas,Diane Hoffmann,Jacques Ravel,Scott A. Jackson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.06.05.596628

2024-06-28

Abstract:Consumer interest in personal microbiome health has given rise to numerous direct-to-consumer (DTC) microbiome testing services despite questions regarding their analytical and clinical validity, and consumer safety. These tests straddle the line between more strictly regulated medical devices and minimally regulated general health and wellness products; a distinction that may not be readily apparent to consumers. To assess the current state of the industry, we evaluated the performance of seven commercial DTC gut microbiome testing services using a standardized NIST - developed human fecal material. Our results reveal major discrepancies, both within and across the different service providers. Significantly, we found variability between providers was on the same scale as biological variability between different donors. We attribute the observed differences to methodological variability and lack of sufficient quality control. Additionally, we highlight that analytical performance is a prerequisite for making sound clinical recommendations. Our results demonstrate the need for standards to ensure analytical validity and regulatory oversight to ensure patient safety.

Microbiology
Public Perspectives on Direct-to-Consumer Testing Oversight

Sharon Jiang,David Lebo,Thomas Schultz

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43441-024-00685-8

2024-08-19

Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science

Abstract:The FDA published a final rule for Medical Devices; Laboratory Developed Tests in the Federal Register on May 6, 2024, which aims to ensure the safety and effectiveness of laboratory developed tests (LDTs) by amending current regulations. The rule also includes a policy to phase out the FDA's general enforcement discretion approach for LDTs, aligning them with other In Vitro Diagnostic Devices. Notably, direct-to-consumer (DTC) testing is exempt from this policy shift, as the FDA believes this category of tests has already met applicable requirements. This rule was first proposed in the Federal Register on October 3, 2023. The publication of this proposed rule sparked a considerable volume of public reactions during the comment period of the rule-making process, comprising general sentiment, key concerns, and suggestions. This commentary analyzes these concerns, particularly focusing on DTC tests, and offers recommendations, including reassessing the FDA's enforcement discretion for hybrid DTC tests, advocating for clear guidance on clinical oversight, and prioritizing a risk-based enforcement approach. Additionally, enhancing public education about the risks of DTC testing is crucial for safeguarding public health.

pharmacology & pharmacy,medical informatics
[Direct-to-consumer genetic testing: a regulation by the market, or a medical regulation?]

Henri Jautrou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1051/medsci/2019264

Abstract:The direct-to-consumer genetic testing (DTC-GT) market has been developing for about twenty years now, raising various debates, even controversies. But what about the regulation of these so-called "innovative" devices, but whose medical status is ambiguous? A first regulatory aspect is depending on the market itself, since the latter is currently subjected to a strong structuring process. A second regulatory aspect, more classical, is the legal one. While the DTC-GT status has long been unclear on European scale, a new text (a Regulation, not a Directive) is modifying the situation. It encourages regulation "by the market" rather than "by the medical profession", which does not imply that the latter will have no (indirect) impact on the DTC-GT market.
Direct-to-consumer tests advertised online in Australia and their implications for medical overuse: systematic online review and a typology of clinical utility

Patti Shih,Pauline Ding,Stacy M Carter,Fiona Stanaway,Andrea R Horvath,Daman Langguth,Mirette Saad,Andrew St John,Katy Bell

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-074205

IF: 3.006

2023-12-27

BMJ Open

Abstract:Objectives: The objective of this study is to map the range and variety of direct-to-consumer (DTC) tests advertised online in Australia and analyse their potential clinical utility and implications for medical overuse. Design: Systematic online search of DTC test products in Google and Google Shopping. DTC test advertisements data were collected and analysed to develop a typology of potential clinical utility of the tests at population level, assessing their potential benefits and harms using available evidence, informed by concepts of medical overuse. Results: We identified 484 DTC tests (103 unique products), ranging from $A12.99 to $A1947 in cost (mean $A197.83; median $A148.50). Using our typology, we assigned the tests into one of four categories: tests with potential clinical utility (10.7%); tests with limited clinical utility (30.6%); non-evidence-based commercial 'health checks' (41.9%); and tests whose methods and/or target conditions are not recognised by the general medical community (16.7%). Of the products identified, 56% did not state that they offered pretest or post-test consultation, and 51% did not report analytical performance of the test or laboratory accreditation. Conclusions: This first-in-Australia study shows most DTC tests sold online have low potential clinical utility, with healthy consumers constituting the main target market. Harms may be caused by overdiagnosis, high rates of false positives and treatment decisions led by non-evidence-based tests, as well as financial costs of unnecessary and inappropriate testing. Regulatory mechanisms should demand a higher standard of evidence of clinical utility and efficacy for DTC tests. Better transparency and reporting of health outcomes, and the development of decision-support resources for consumers are needed.
Regulating molecular diagnostic assays: developing a new regulatory structure for a new technology

Jeffrey N Gibbs

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1586/erm.11.20

2011-05-01

Expert Review of Molecular Diagnostics

Abstract:Molecular diagnostics are playing an increasingly important part in the practice of medicine. However, molecular diagnostics have not yet made the clinical impact that many had predicted. Multiple factors affect the uptake and utilization of molecular diagnostics, including government regulation. Current regulatory systems were not developed to optimize regulation of molecular diagnostics. This article recommends areas that should be carefully evaluated and appropriately revised, including risk assessment, review criteria and facilitating product improvements. The adoption of molecular diagnostics will be advanced as regulatory criteria become more predictable and their application becomes more consistent between products and over time.

pathology
Policy Guidance for Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing Services: Framework Development Study

Suzanne Maria Onstwedder,Marleen Elizabeth Jansen,Martina Cornelia Cornel,Tessel Rigter

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/47389

2024-07-17

Abstract:Background: The online offer of commercial genetic tests, also called direct-to-consumer genetic tests (DTC-GTs), enables citizens to gain insight into their health and disease risk based on their genetic profiles. DTC-GT offers often consist of a combination of services or aspects, including advertisements, information, DNA analysis, and medical or lifestyle advice. The risks and benefits of DTC-GT services have been debated and studied extensively, but instruments that assess DTC-GT services and aid policy are lacking. This leads to uncertainty among policy makers, law enforcers, and regulators on how to ensure and balance both public safety and autonomy and about the responsibilities these 3 parties have toward the public. Objective: This study aimed to develop a framework that outlines aspects of DTC-GTs that lead to policy issues and to help provide policy guidance regarding DTC-GT services. Methods: We performed 3 steps: (1) an integrative literature review to identify risks and benefits of DTC-GT services for consumers and society in Embase and Medline (January 2014-June 2022), (2) structuring benefits and risks in different steps of the consumer journey, and (3) development of a checklist for policy guidance. Results: Potential risks and benefits of DTC-GT services were mapped from 134 papers and structured into 6 phases. In summary, these phases were called the consumer journey: (1) exposure, (2) pretest information, (3) DNA analysis, (4) data management, (5) posttest information, and (6) individual and societal impact. The checklist for evaluation of DTC-GT services consisted of 8 themes, covering 38 items that may raise policy issues in DTC-GT services. The themes included the following aspects: general service content, validity and quality assurance, potential data and privacy risks, scientific evidence and robustness, and quality of the provided information. Conclusions: Both the consumer journey and the checklist break the DTC-GT offer down into key aspects that may impact and compromise individual and public health, safety, and autonomy. This framework helps policy makers, regulators, and law enforcers develop methods to interpret, assess, and act in the DTC-GT service market.
FDA's proposed rule for the regulation of laboratory-developed tests

Melissa B. Miller,Mary Lee Watts,Linoj Samuel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.01488-23

2024-01-12

Journal of Clinical Microbiology

Abstract:ABSTRACT In October 2023, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released a proposed rule that ends enforcement discretion for laboratory-developed tests (LDTs). The FDA’s proposal outlines a five-stage implementation to begin regulating LDTs as they do for commercial in vitro diagnostics (IVDs), including modified FDA-approved/cleared tests. We outline here concerns from the clinical and public health microbiology laboratory perspective. It is our opinion that LDTs performed by individual Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments-certified diagnostic laboratories should not be regulated in the same way as commercial IVDs. This rule, if finalized, will negatively impact the diagnostic services currently offered by clinical and public health laboratories and, therefore, patients and the providers who care for them. Ending enforcement discretion will likely stifle diagnostic innovation and decrease access to diagnostic testing and health equity. Furthermore, the lack of infrastructure, including personnel and funding, at the FDA and diagnostic laboratories to support the required submissions for review is an obstacle. Like the FDA, diagnostic laboratories prioritize patient safety, accurate clinical diagnostics, and health equity. Since the scope of the LDT landscape is currently unknown, we are supportive of a registration process, along with non-burdensome adverse event reporting, to first understand the scope of clinical use of LDTs and any associated safety concerns. Any regulatory rule should be based on data that have been gathered systematically, not anecdotes or case reports. A rule must also balance the potential negative impact to patient care with realistic safety risks for infectious disease diagnostics.

microbiology
RECONCEPTUALIZING CONSENT FOR DIRECT-TO-CONSUMER HEALTH SERVICES

Kayte Spector-Bagdady

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0098858815622191

Abstract:The market for direct-to-consumer (DTC) health services continues to grow rapidly with former patients converting to customers for the opportunity to purchase varied diagnostic tests without the involvement of their clinician. For the first time a DTC genetic testing company is advertising health-related reports "that meet [Food and Drug Administration] standards for being clinically and scientifically valid." Ethicists and regulatory agencies alike have recognized the need for a more informed transaction in the DTC context, but how should we classify a commercial transaction for something normally protected by a duty of care? How can we assure informed agreements in an industry with terms and conditions as varied as the services performed? The doctrine of "informed consent" began as an ethical construct building on the promise of beneficence in the clinical relationship and elevating the principle of autonomy--but in the DTC context should we hold providers to legal standards of informed consent and associated medical malpractice liability, or contractual obligations where consumers would seek remedy for breach? This Article analyzes the fine balance that must be struck in an industry where companies are selling services for entertainment or non-medical purposes that possess the capacity to produce serious and disquieting medical information. It begins by reviewing current standards of consent in the clinical setting from both a legal and ethical perspective and then lays forth current standards for DTC consent using two currently controversial case studies: that of keepsake fetal ultrasound and genetic testing. DTC keepsake ultrasound and genetic testing providers attempt to de-medicalize the devices used for these procedures from their intended medical uses to non-medical uses. But while keepsake ultrasound is marketed as "intended for entertainment purposes only," it can provide medical information as an incidental finding. 23andMe currently purports to be the only DTC genetics service that "includes" reports that meet FDA qualifications, despite disclaimers of intent to "provide medical advice." The attempted de-medicalization of these devices, therefore, has not been fully transformative, and DTC providers should have more robust ethical and legal duties than the average goods and services seller. This Article delineates these responsibilities, beginning with ethical duties surrounding marketing, entering into, and providing DTC services. It then turns to the legal paradigms necessary to enable, or at least allow for, DTC providers to meet these ethical obligations. While it argues that contractual, as opposed to fiduciary, requirements are most appropriate and that waivers of liability will likely be upheld, it also advocates for a heightened expectation of disclosure during contracting.
The Impact of Regulatory Policies on the Future of Fecal Microbiota Transplantation

Alexander Khoruts,Diane E Hoffmann,Francis B Palumbo,Diane E. Hoffmann,Francis B. Palumbo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1073110519897726

2019-01-01

Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics

Abstract:In this article, the authors explore the impact of a potential future regulatory decision by FDA whether or not to continue its enforcement discretion policy allowing physicians to perform, and stool banks to sell, stool product for fecal microbiota transplantation as a treatment for recurrent Clostridium Difficile infection without an Investigative New Drug (IND) application. The paper looks at the Agency's regulatory options in light of the current gut microbiota based products that are in the FDA pipeline for drug approval and the potential impact and repercussions of their approval on FDA action. In laying out FDA's options we consider the implications of market exclusivity and off-label use of newly approved drugs. Ultimately, we explore the potential impact of FDA's decision on patients, research, and innovation.
Regulating Laboratory Tests: What Framework Would Best Support Safety and Validity?

CAROLINE HORROW,AARON S. KESSELHEIM

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0009.12701

2024-05-15

Milbank Quarterly

Abstract:Policy Points With increasing public attention to cases of inaccurate and misleading laboratory‐developed tests, there have been calls for regulatory reform. To protect patients from faulty laboratory tests, we need a framework that balances comprehensive test review with laboratory flexibility. The Verifying Accurate Leading‐edge IVCT [In Vitro Clinical Test] Development (VALID) Act would have helped ensure laboratory test safety and validity through a much‐needed expansion of Food and Drug Administration (FDA) oversight. However, Congress did not pass the VALID Act in 2022, forcing the FDA to start the regulatory reform process on its own.

health care sciences & services,health policy & services
An analysis of direct-to-consumer genetic testing portals and their communication of health risk and test limitations

Nicole M Lee,Matthew S VanDyke,Alan Abitbol,Kaylynne Wallace,Christina Meneses

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jgc4.1967

2024-09-15

Abstract:Direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing has become incredibly popular for assessing health risk related to specific diseases. However, how this risk is conveyed and whether the limitations of the tests are fully communicated can impact how customers interpret results. Through a qualitative content analysis of three different DTC genetic testing online portals, we examine how companies communicate relative and absolute health risks, the extent to which limitations are communicated, and how this information is presented. Findings suggest that relative risk was more prominently communicated than absolute risk and that it was used to organize and prioritize results. Further, risk information was often communicated using statistical terms and concepts that may not be accessible to all users. Test limitations that were communicated included the inability to diagnose a disease, the importance of lifestyle factors, and that the tests do not account for all genetic variants. Although companies included this information, it was not visually prominent.
Establishing What Constitutes a Healthy Human Gut Microbiome: State of the Science, Regulatory Considerations, and Future Directions

Michael I McBurney,Cindy Davis,Claire M Fraser,Barbara O Schneeman,Curtis Huttenhower,Kristin Verbeke,Jens Walter,Marie E Latulippe

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jn/nxz154

2019-08-02

Abstract:ABSTRACT On December 17, 2018, the North American branch of the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI North America) convened a workshop “Can We Begin to Define a Healthy Gut Microbiome Through Quantifiable Characteristics?” with >40 invited academic, government, and industry experts in Washington, DC. The workshop objectives were to 1) develop a collective expert assessment of the state of the evidence on the human gut microbiome and associated human health benefits, 2) see if there was sufficient evidence to establish measurable gut microbiome characteristics that could serve as indicators of “health,” 3) identify short- and long-term research needs to fully characterize healthy gut microbiome–host relationships, and 4) publish the findings. Conclusions were as follows: 1) mechanistic links of specific changes in gut microbiome structure with function or markers of human health are not yet established; 2) it is not established if dysbiosis is a cause, consequence, or both of changes in human gut epithelial function and disease; 3) microbiome communities are highly individualized, show a high degree of interindividual variation to perturbation, and tend to be stable over years; 4) the complexity of microbiome-host interactions requires a comprehensive, multidisciplinary research agenda to elucidate relationships between gut microbiome and host health; 5) biomarkers and/or surrogate indicators of host function and pathogenic processes based on the microbiome need to be determined and validated, along with normal ranges, using approaches similar to those used to establish biomarkers and/or surrogate indicators based on host metabolic phenotypes; 6) future studies measuring responses to an exposure or intervention need to combine validated microbiome-related biomarkers and/or surrogate indicators with multiomics characterization of the microbiome; and 7) because static genetic sampling misses important short- and long-term microbiome-related dynamic changes to host health, future studies must be powered to account for inter- and intraindividual variation and should use repeated measures within individuals.

nutrition & dietetics
Considerations for Implementation of Cancer Molecular Diagnostics Into Clinical Care

Daniel F Hayes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/EDBK_160236

Abstract:Physicians have provided personalized care with as much precision as possible for several centuries. However, increasingly sophisticated understanding of the human genome and of cancer biology has permitted identification of genetic and phenotypic distinctions that might permit development of new tumor biomarker tests for risk categorization, screening, differential diagnosis, prognosis, prediction, and monitoring. Both commercial and academic laboratories are offering tests for single analytes, panels of tests of single analytes, multiparameter assays coalesced into a signature, and total genomic, transcriptomic, or proteomic analyses. However, the absence of a consistent regulatory environment has led to marketing of assays without proven analytic validity or clinical utility. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval or clearance does not necessarily imply that use of the test will improve patient outcomes, and FDA discretion to permit laboratory-developed tests results in unknown benefit, or harm, of others. In this regard, a "bad tumor marker is as bad as a bad drug." Caveat emptor is not a satisfactory approach to delivering high-quality care. Rather, adoption of tumor biomarker tests should be based on high levels of evidence generated in scientifically rigorous studies that demonstrate both analytical validity and clinical utility. Doing so will ensure that clinicians and patients are confident that a tumor biomarker test is likely to improve their outcomes.
Microbiome interventions for children raise the ethical stakes

Sam Jones

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-03971-5

IF: 64.8

2024-12-06

Nature

Abstract:Physicians are voicing concerns about a lack of regulation and the risks of parents taking matters into their own hands. Physicians are voicing concerns about a lack of regulation and the risks of parents taking matters into their own hands.

multidisciplinary sciences
Economic regulation of next-generation sequencing

Barbara J Evans

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jlme.12162

Abstract:Next-generation sequencing broadens the debate about appropriate regulatory oversight of genetic testing and may force scholars to move beyond familiar privacy and health and safety regulatory issues to address new problems with industry structure and economic regulation. The genetic testing industry is passing through a period of profound structural change in response to shifts in technology and in the legal environment. Making genetic testing safe and effective for consumers increasingly requires access to comprehensive genomic data infrastructures that can support accurate, state-of-the-art interpretation of genetic test results. At present, there are significant barriers to access and there is no sector-specific regulator with power to ensure appropriate data access. Without it, genetic testing will not be safe for consumers even when it is performed at CLIA-certified laboratories using tests that have been FDA-cleared or approved. This article explores the emerging structure of the genetic testing industry and describes its present economic regulatory vacuum. In view of this gap in regulation, the article explores whether generally applicable law, particularly antitrust law, may offer solutions to the industry's data access problems. It concludes that courts may have a useful role to play, particularly in Europe and other jurisdictions where the essential facilities doctrine enjoys continued vitality. After Verizon Communications v. Law Offices of Curtis V. Trinko, the role of U.S. federal courts is less certain. Congress has demonstrated willingness to address access issues as they emerged in other infrastructure industries in recent decades. This article expresses no preference between legislative and judicial solutions. Its aim is simply to highlight an emerging economic regulatory issue which, if left unresolved, presents real health and safety concerns for consumers who receive genetic tests.
Community-led risk analysis of direct-to-consumer whole-genome sequencing

Kenza Samlali,Mackenzie Thornbury,Andrei Venter

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1139/bcb-2021-0506

2022-12-01

Abstract:Direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing is cheaper and more accessible than ever before; however, the intention to combine, reuse, and resell this genetic information as powerful data sets is generally hidden from the consumer. This financial gain is creating a competitive DTC market, reducing the price of whole-genome sequencing (WGS) to under 300 USD. Entering this transition from single-nucleotide polymorphism-based DTC testing to WGS DTC testing, individuals looking for access to their whole-genomic information face new privacy and security risks. Differences between WGS and other methods of consumer genetic tests are left unexplored by regulation, leading to the application of legal data anonymization methods on whole-genome data, and questionable consent methods. Large representative genomic data sets are important for research and improve the standard of medicine and personalized care. However, these data can also be used by market players, law enforcement, and governments for surveillance, population analyses, marketing purposes, and discrimination. Here, we present a summary of the state of WGS DTC genetic testing and its current regulation, through a community-based lens to expose dual-use risks in consumer-facing biotechnologies.
Genetic Privacy and Data Protection: A Review of Chinese Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Test Services

Li Du,Meng Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2020.00416

IF: 3.7

2020-01-01

Frontiers in Genetics

Abstract:Background The existing literature has not examined how Chinese direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing providers navigate the issues of informed consent, privacy, and data protection associated with testing services. This research aims to explore these questions by examining the relevant documents and messages published on websites of the Chinese DTC genetic test providers. Methods Using Baidu.com, the most popular Chinese search engine, we compiled the websites of providers who offer genetic testing services and analyzed available documents related to informed consent, the terms of services, and the privacy policy. The analyses were guided by the following inquiries as they applied to each DTC provider: the methods available for purchasing testing products; the methods providers used to obtain informed consent; privacy issues and measures for protecting consumers’ health information; the policy for third-party data sharing; consumers right to their data; and the liabilities in the event of a data breach. Results 68.7% of providers offer multiple channels for purchasing genetic testing products, and that social media has become a popular platform to promote testing services. Informed consent forms are not available on 94% of providers’ websites and a privacy policy is only offered by 45.8% of DTC genetic testing providers. Thirty-nine providers stated that they used measures to protect consumers’ information, of which, 29 providers have distinguished consumers’ general personal information from their genetic information. In 33.7% of the cases examined, providers stated that with consumers’ explicit permission, they could reuse and share the clients’ information for non-commercial purposes. Twenty-three providers granted consumer rights to their health information, with the most frequently mentioned right being the consumers’ right to decide how their data can be used by providers. Lastly, 21.7% of providers clearly stated their liabilities in the event of a data breach, placing more emphasis on the providers’ exemption from any liability. Conclusions Currently, the Chinese DTC genetic testing business is running in a regulatory vacuum, governed by self-regulation. The government should develop a comprehensive legal framework to regulate DTC genetic testing offerings. Regulatory improvements should be made based on periodical reviews of the supervisory strategy to meet the rapid development of the DTC genetic testing industry.
False-positive results released by direct-to-consumer genetic tests highlight the importance of clinical confirmation testing for appropriate patient care

Stephany Tandy-Connor,Jenna Guiltinan,Kate Krempely,Holly LaDuca,Patrick Reineke,Stephanie Gutierrez,Phillip Gray,Brigette Tippin Davis

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/gim.2018.38

IF: 8.864

2018-12-01

Genetics in Medicine

Abstract:PurposeThere is increasing demand from the public for direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic tests, and the US Food and Drug Administration limits the type of health-related claims DTC tests can market. Some DTC companies provide raw genotyping data to customers if requested, and these raw data may include variants occurring in genes recommended by the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics to be reported as incidental/secondary findings. The purpose of this study was to review the outcome of requests for clinical confirmation of DTC results that were received by our laboratory and to analyze variant classification concordance.MethodsWe identified 49 patient samples received for further testing that had previously identified genetic variants reported in DTC raw data. For each case identified, information pertaining to the outcome of clinical confirmation testing as well as classification of the DTC variant was collected and analyzed.ResultsOur analyses indicated that 40% of variants in a variety of genes reported in DTC raw data were false positives. In addition, some variants designated with the “increased risk” classification in DTC raw data or by a third-party interpretation service were classified as benign at Ambry Genetics as well as several other clinical laboratories, and are noted to be common variants in publicly available population frequency databases.ConclusionOur results demonstrate the importance of confirming DTC raw data variants in a clinical laboratory that is well versed in both complex variant detection and classification.

genetics & heredity
The FDA’s Proposed Rule on Laboratory-Developed Tests: Impacts on Clinical Laboratory Testing and Patient Care

Leslie Smith,Lisa A. Carricaburu,Jonathan R. Genzen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.02.28.24303459

2024-03-01

Abstract:In October 2023, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released a proposed rule to regulate laboratory-developed tests (LDTs) as medical devices. While approximately 6,700 public comments were submitted during the open comment period, there is not a reliable mechanism to quantify how clinical laboratorians as a sector perceive the proposed rule. To solicit quantifiable feedback on the FDA’s proposed rule, a ten-item questionnaire was developed and submitted to clinical laboratory customers of ARUP Laboratories, a national nonprofit clinical laboratory of the University of Utah Department of Pathology. Of 503 clinical laboratory respondents, only 41 (8.2%) support the FDA’s proposed rule. 66.9% of respondents work in laboratories that perform LDTs and were therefore asked additional questions regarding the proposed rule. 83.9% of these respondents believe that the proposed rule will negatively impact their laboratories, while only 3.0% believe that they have the financial resources to pay for FDA user fees. 60.9% of respondents anticipate removing tests from their laboratory menus if the proposed rule is enacted, while an additional 33.2% indicated that they do not yet know. Only 11.2% of respondents believe that they would pursue FDA submissions for all of their existing LDTs if the final rule is enacted. The vast majority of respondents (>80%) were either ‘extremely concerned’ or ‘very concerned’ about the impact of the proposed rule on patient access to essential testing, financial and personnel resources to comply, innovation, the FDA’s ability to implement the proposed rule, and send-out costs and test prices. Respondents indicated that they would rely heavily on reference laboratory partners for advocacy against the proposed rule, testing options, education, and consultation if the rule was enacted. Thematic analysis of open comments revealed strong opposition to the proposed rule and significant concern regarding negative impacts to patient care across clinical laboratory settings.

Health Policy
Microarray Technology: Unresolved Issues And Future Challenges From A Regulatory Perspective

Leming Shi,Federico M. Goodsaid,Felix W. Frueh,Weida Tong

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/4243_2008_035

2008-01-01

Abstract:Despite their growing popularity in the research community, DNA microarray-based gene expression assays have not yet been approved or licensed by the US. Food and Drug Administration for clinical or regulatory decision-making. While recent publications demonstrated the technical reliability of microarray technology, there are several challenges that still need to be addressed so that micro array-based gene expression data can be accepted for routine use in clinical and regulatory environments. First, appropriate quality-control metrics and thresholds are needed for objectively assessing the quality of microarray data from individual laboratories. Secondly, consensus on the analysis of microarray data is needed. Thirdly, adequate evaluation and validation of microarray results is needed so that non-reproducible chance correlations can be avoided in handling high-dimensional microarray data.

The DTC microbiome testing industry needs more regulation

Evaluating the Analytical Performance of Direct-to-Consumer Gut Microbiome Testing Services

Public Perspectives on Direct-to-Consumer Testing Oversight

[Direct-to-consumer genetic testing: a regulation by the market, or a medical regulation?]

Direct-to-consumer tests advertised online in Australia and their implications for medical overuse: systematic online review and a typology of clinical utility

Regulating molecular diagnostic assays: developing a new regulatory structure for a new technology

Policy Guidance for Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing Services: Framework Development Study

FDA's proposed rule for the regulation of laboratory-developed tests

RECONCEPTUALIZING CONSENT FOR DIRECT-TO-CONSUMER HEALTH SERVICES

The Impact of Regulatory Policies on the Future of Fecal Microbiota Transplantation

Regulating Laboratory Tests: What Framework Would Best Support Safety and Validity?

An analysis of direct-to-consumer genetic testing portals and their communication of health risk and test limitations

Establishing What Constitutes a Healthy Human Gut Microbiome: State of the Science, Regulatory Considerations, and Future Directions

Considerations for Implementation of Cancer Molecular Diagnostics Into Clinical Care

Microbiome interventions for children raise the ethical stakes

Economic regulation of next-generation sequencing

Community-led risk analysis of direct-to-consumer whole-genome sequencing

Genetic Privacy and Data Protection: A Review of Chinese Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Test Services

False-positive results released by direct-to-consumer genetic tests highlight the importance of clinical confirmation testing for appropriate patient care

The FDA’s Proposed Rule on Laboratory-Developed Tests: Impacts on Clinical Laboratory Testing and Patient Care

Microarray Technology: Unresolved Issues And Future Challenges From A Regulatory Perspective