FDA and CMS Form Task Force on LDT Quality Requirements

By: Jeffrey Shuren, M.D., J.D. and Patrick H. Conway, MD, MSc

Health care providers and their patients expect that laboratory tests used in clinical management of patients should be consistent and of high quality.

Jeffrey Shuren

Jeff Shuren, M.D., J.D.

Under FDA’s proposed framework for the oversight of laboratory developed tests (LDTs), outlined in draft guidance documents issued in October 2014, FDA would oversee the quality of these laboratory tests, alongside the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), which regulate the laboratories themselves through the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA). We have heard stakeholder confusion about the roles of the two agencies in ensuring quality and concerns about potentially duplicative efforts. To coordinate efforts across the Department, FDA and CMS are establishing an interagency task force that will continue and expand on our collaboration related to the oversight of LDTs, which are tests intended for clinical use and designed, manufactured, and used within a single lab. The task force, comprised of leaders and subject matter experts from each agency, will work to address a range of issues, including those involving quality requirements for LDTs.

Patrick H. Conway, MD, MSc

Patrick H. Conway, MD, MSc

Under the proposed LDT framework, FDA would phase in enforcement of premarket review requirements and the quality system regulation for some LDTs. FDA’s oversight of LDTs will assure that the tests are both analytically valid (able to accurately detect analytes) and clinically valid (able to measure or detect the clinical condition for which the test is intended). FDA is currently reviewing public comments on the draft guidances that it received through an open public docket and a two-day public meeting. In response to public comments, FDA may modify the proposed framework when we issue final guidance.

CMS, under CLIA, oversees the labs’ processes, rather than the tests they develop. CLIA and its implementing regulations include requirements for establishing and maintaining quality laboratory operations and ensuring the lab is staffed by qualified personnel. These laws do not require premarket review of tests or any evidence that a test is clinically valid.

When FDA’s proposed framework is implemented, both FDA and CMS will play a role in ensuring that LDTs are high quality—CMS through CLIA by continuing to focus on laboratory operations including the testing process and FDA by enforcing compliance with the agency’s quality systems regulation pertaining to the design and manufacture of the laboratory tests.

Although the roles of the agencies are different, FDA and CMS share an interest in ensuring effective and efficient oversight of LDTs so laboratories can offer tests to the American public with confidence that they are accurate and provide clinically meaningful information without unnecessary or duplicative agency oversight.

The goals of the FDA/CMS Task Force on LDT Quality Requirements include:

  • identifying areas of similarity between the FDA quality system regulation and requirements under CLIA;
  • working together to clarify responsibilities for laboratories that fall under the purview of both agencies; and
  • leveraging joint resources to avoid duplication and maximize efficiency.

The task force is currently exploring areas where collaboration may realize greater oversight efficiency and produce the greatest benefit to patients, providers, and laboratories. The task force understands stakeholders’ concerns about differences in terminology used by FDA and CMS. We intend to clarify the terms used so that labs may better understand what is expected of them.

Our new task force is committed to its stakeholders and intends to provide education and outreach, including an upcoming webinar series, to address additional needs that are identified during this collaboration. We welcome any feedback and encourage you to contact us at LDTFramework@fda.hhs.gov.

Jeffrey Shuren, M.D., J.D., is Director of FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health

Patrick H. Conway, MD, MSc, is Acting Principal Deputy Administrator CMS Chief Medical Officer

“Breakthrough” Designation … Another Powerful Tool in FDA’s Toolbox for Expediting the Development and Review of Promising New Drugs for Serious Conditions

By: Janet Woodcock, M.D.

Janet Woodcock, M.D. is the Director of FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research

In fiscal year 2012, FDA approved 35 novel new drugs, also known as “new molecular entities.” Among these new products were drugs to treat patients with unmet medical needs, such as a groundbreaking treatment for a form of cystic fibrosis, the first FDA-approved human cord blood product for hematopoietic reconstitution, used to help patients with blood forming disorders, and the first drug to treat advanced basal cell carcinoma (a form of the most common skin cancer).

To enable our ongoing efforts to bring innovative drug products to the public as efficiently as possible, FDA relies heavily on several expedited development and review tools such as fast track designation, the accelerated approval pathway and priority review designation. For instance, 56 percent of the novel drugs approved by the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research in calendar year 2012 used some combination of these tools to speed promising therapies to patients with serious conditions. And any given drug may have received multiple expedited program designations. (See a brief summary of how each of these tools helps FDA shorten the development and review of promising new therapies.)

In July 2012, a provision in the new law called the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act, or FDASIA for short, gave FDA another powerful expedited development tool, known as the “breakthrough therapy” designation. This new designation is now helping FDA assist drug developers expedite the development of new drugs with preliminary clinical evidence that indicates the drug may offer a substantial improvement over available therapies for patients with serious or life-threatening diseases. Although the designation is not yet even a year old, FDA has received 62 requests to grant this new designation to products under development. We have been very active on this subject, meeting with companies and discussing ways to expedite the drug development process for drugs that show striking early results. We have already granted the breakthrough designation to 20 potential innovative new drugs that have shown encouraging early clinical results.

Drug developers should have a clear understanding of all of FDA’s expedited development and review tools. To help industry better understand each tool, including when the tools can be used and the features of each, we have just published an industry draft guidance titled Expedited Programs for Serious Conditions — Drugs and BiologicsAmong other important information, the draft guidance describes FDA’s policies and the threshold criteria for each expedited program, defines and discusses important concepts, including serious condition, unmet medical need, and available therapy, and provides some general considerations for products utilizing an expedited program, such as manufacturing and product quality, nonclinical considerations, and clinical inspection considerations.

The breakthrough therapy designation gives us another tool in our “toolbox” to help expedite the development and review of new drugs to treat patients with serious medical conditions and little or no treatment options. We’ll continue to use the new breakthrough therapy designation and our existing tools to help make our expedited programs even more effective.

We’ve said it before — and I believe it’s worth repeating — our decision-making on whether to approve a drug always involves an evaluation of many factors, such as the seriousness of the disease.  However, ultimately any drug approved must show that its benefits outweigh its risks and regardless of which expedited development or review program or programs are used, FDA does not compromise its safety or efficacy standards in exchange for rapid approval. Like all drugs we approve, those approved after having been designated as breakthrough therapies will meet our usual rigorous standards for safety and effectiveness.

Janet Woodcock, M.D. is the Director of FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research