ArticleFood and drug law journal2015
The Limits of FDA's Authority to Regulate Clinical Research Involving High-Throughput DNA Sequencing.
Article in Food and drug law journal, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Genetic Profiling of Acute and Chronic Leukemia via Next-Generation Sequencing: Current Insights and Future Perspectives.Hematology reports · 2025Review
- Ethical Oversight and Social Licensing of Portable MRI Research.The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics · 2024Article
- Regulation of Laboratory-Developed Tests in Preventive Oncology: Emerging Needs and Opportunities.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2023Review
- Whole-genome sequencing as an investigational device for return of hereditary disease risk and pharmacogenomic results as part of the All of Us Research Program.Genome medicine · 2022Article
- Who's on third? Regulation of third-party genetic interpretation services.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2020Review
- THE GENETIC INFORMATION NONDISCRIMINATION ACT AT AGE 10: GINA'S CONTROVERSIAL ASSERTION THAT DATA TRANSPARENCY PROTECTS PRIVACY AND CIVIL RIGHTS.William and Mary law review · 2019Article
- FDA oversight of NSIGHT genomic research: the need for an integrated systems approach to regulation.NPJ genomic medicine · 2019Review
- Cost of cancer diagnosis using next-generation sequencing targeted gene panels in routine practice: a nationwide French study.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2018Article
- Assessing the Costs and Cost-Effectiveness of Genomic Sequencing.Journal of personalized medicine · 2015Review
- FDA's Proposed Guidance for Laboratory Developed Tests: How Should Regulators Balance the Risks and Promise of Innovation in Clinical Genetics?FDLI's food and drug policy forum · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently signaled its interest in subjecting clinical investigations that employ high-throughput gene sequencing, also called next-generation sequencing, to the agency's Part 812 investigational device exemption (IDE) regulation. Genome sequencing--for reasons explained in this article--blurs the line between categories of in vitro diagnostic (IVD) research that FDA traditionally has regulated and categories of research that FDA traditionally has not regulated. This blurring creates a risk that FDA may overstep its proper authority to regulate fundamental genomic and medical research. This article surveys the legal limits of FDA's authority'to subject genomic research to its IDE requirements. Section 1 explains that FDA has authority to regulate clinical investigations of devices, but is not authorized to regulate investigations that merely use devices to expand medical knowledge or to conduct fundamental research, unless special circumstances apply. Section 2 discusses the special circumstances that can expand or limit FDA's authority to regulate a specific clinical investigation, and Section 3 demonstrates these using an example. Section 4 explores concerns that arose in recent years about risks to human subjects in a certain type of investigation known as sponsor-investigator studies. In response to these concerns, FDA has suggested that it can regulate such studies in ways that threaten to expand FDA's regulation of research at academic medical centers beyond its proper scope. These concerns, while valid in some academic research contexts, seem inapposite in the setting of genomic research programs funded by responsible.entities such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Moreover, FDA's regulations do not. appear to support the proposition that FDA can regulate sponsor-investigator studies more expansively than it regulates other studies. Section 5 explores specific ways that NIH, clinical investigators, and FDA might work together to rationalize FDA's regulation of NIH-funded-genomic research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26302600PMC4576719What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.