COVID-19 Lab Tests: HHS Withdraws Policy Limiting FDA’s Review, and FDA Issues an Updated Policy Requiring EUAs

On November 15, 2021, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced the withdrawal of the policy established during the previous administration that limited U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) ability to require that certain laboratory developed tests (LDTs), including COVID-19 tests, a type of test that is generally designed, manufactured, and used in a single laboratory, receive premarket approval (PMA) or clearance (510(k)), or emergency use authorization (EUA).

FDA has historically asserted that it has the authority to regulate LDTs as medical devices, but has generally exercised enforcement discretion over such tests except for certain test categories, e.g., pharmacogenomic (PGx) tests, direct-to-consumer tests (in vitro diagnostics that are marketed to consumers without the involvement of a healthcare provider), and tests that respond to emerging pandemics.

On August 19, 2020, HHS published a brief announcement on its website that FDA, an agency within HHS, shall not require premarket review of LDTs, absent notice-and-comment rulemaking. FDA responded by saying that it would no longer review such EUAs, and in December 2020, HHS ordered FDA to resume LDT EUA application review. Prior to HHS’ most recent announcement, FDA encouraged test developers to submit EUA requests for serology (antibody) tests, but stated, in relevant part, that it would not object to the development and use of serology tests to identify antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 by laboratories that are certified under CLIA to perform high-complexity testing. FDA, Guidance for Developers and Food and Drug Administration Staff, Policy for Coronavirus Disease-2019 Tests During the Public Health Emergency (Revised) (May 11, 2020).

On November 15, 2021, FDA issued the fifth edition of its guidance entitled Policy for Coronavirus Disease-2019 Tests During the Public Health Emergency (Revised)*. Importantly, FDA made clear that it generally expects COVID-19 tests to have been issued an EUA prior to the tests being distributed or offered, and that FDA’s decision to review and process an EUA request, and ultimately issue an EUA if the relevant statutory criteria are met, is based on a determination, on a case-by-case basis, that such action is necessary to protect the public health in an emergency. The policy outlined FDA’s enforcement policies regarding certain COVID-19 tests for the duration of the public health emergency. Currently, FDA intends to focus its review on EUA requests for the following types of tests:

Diagnostic tests (molecular and antigen) that can be used at the Point of Care (POC) or completely at home from developers who have indicated the ability to scale up manufacturing capacity shortly after authorization (e.g., a manufacturing capacity of ≥500,000 tests per week within 3 months of authorization;
Laboratory-based molecular diagnostic tests that are: highly sensitive; high throughput; intended for pooling, home specimen collection, screening, or detection of multiple analytes; and from experienced developers who have indicated the ability to scale up manufacturing capacity shortly after authorization (e.g., a manufacturing capacity of ≥500,000 tests per week within 3 months of authorization);
Home specimen collection kits intended for use with laboratory-based molecular diagnostic tests, where the manufacturer has indicated the ability to scale up to a manufacturing capacity shortly after authorization (e.g., ≥500,000 kits per week within 3 months of authorization);
Laboratory-based and POC serology tests that are: high throughput, if laboratory-based; intended for the quantitative measurement of antibody titers; and from developers who have indicated the ability to scale up manufacturing capacity shortly after authorization (e.g., a manufacturing capacity of ≥500,000 tests per week within 3 months of authorization);
Laboratory-based and POC serology tests that are: intended for the quantitative detection of neutralizing antibodies; and from developers who have indicated the ability to scale up manufacturing capacity shortly after authorization (e.g., a manufacturing capacity of ≥500,000 tests per week within 3 months of authorization); and
Tests for which the EUA request is from (or supported by) a US government stakeholder, such as tests funded by the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) or the National Institutes of Health’s Rapid Acceleration of Diagnostics (RADx).

Further, for tests intended for use on instruments not used for previously authorized tests, FDA intends to prioritize those tests where the developer indicates sufficient instrument and kit production capacity. For tests intended for use with home collection kits, FDA intends to prioritize those tests where there is sufficient assay and collection kit production capacity.

For tests not authorized and not being offered by November 15, 2021, FDA expects it will only review EUA requests for priority tests. FDA will notify test developers of such tests by email if FDA declines to review or otherwise decides not to authorize the test. Developers of other tests may consider pursuing marketing authorization through traditional device review pathways such as 510(k) notification or De Novo classification.

Foley is here to help you address the short- and long-term impacts in the wake of regulatory changes. We have the resources to help you navigate these and other important legal considerations related to business operations and industry-specific issues. Please reach out to the authors, your Foley relationship partner, or to our Health Care Practice Group with any questions.

Disclaimer

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.