On July 8, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) announced its updated guidance, “Addressing Misinformation About Medical Devices and Prescription Drugs: Questions and Answers,” which provides recommendations and examples for firms who choose to address misinformation about or related to their approved or cleared drug or device.[1] This guidance revises and replaces FDA’s 2014 draft guidance titled “Internet/Social Media Platforms: Correcting Independent Third-Party Misinformation About Prescription Drugs and Medical Devices.” Social media users from 2014 will appreciate how different the world looks today and why—even though it took FDA ten years—this revision is a welcomed shift making it more straightforward for firms to respond to misinformation.Continue Reading FDA Revisits and Updates Guidance on Addressing Misinformation – Ten Years Later
Digital Health & Medical Devices
OIG Permits Medical Device Manufacturer’s Cost-Sharing Subsidies for Medicare Beneficiaries in Clinical Trial
Last month, in the last advisory opinion issued by the Office of Inspector General (“OIG”) in 2023 – Advisory Opinion No. 23-11 (the “Opinion”) – OIG “blessed” an arrangement involving a medical device manufacturer (the “Requestor”) and its proposed payment of cost-sharing subsidies. Maintaining its position from similar opinions issued in recent years, OIG said that it would not impose sanctions under the Federal Anti-Kickback Statute (the “AKS”) or the Beneficiary Inducements Civil Monetary Penalty (the “CMP”) against the Requestor for paying cost-sharing subsidies to clinical trial participants to cover the participants’ share of costs for reimbursable, study-related items and services that the participants would otherwise be required to pay out of pocket.[1] This Opinion illustrates that OIG appears to remain willing to permit arrangements that do not fall squarely within an AKS safe harbor in order to incentivize participation, especially diverse participation, in clinical trials for medical devices.Continue Reading OIG Permits Medical Device Manufacturer’s Cost-Sharing Subsidies for Medicare Beneficiaries in Clinical Trial
FDA Maintains Focus on “Intended Use” for Software-Enabled Medical Devices
On June 21, 2023, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) issued a warning letter to Zyto Technologies, Inc. (“Zyto”), citing Zyto’s promotion of its Hand Cradle Galvanic Skin Response (“GSR”) device and associated software for uses outside the scope of the device’s 510(k) clearance.[1] This warning letter is one of only a handful issued this year to medical-device manufacturers, and comes shortly after FDA issued a warning letter to iRhythm Technologies, which we wrote about, for touting uses for a remote monitoring device which were, in FDA’s opinion, outside the scope of the product’s 510(k) clearance.[2] These enforcement actions indicate that FDA is keeping a close eye on the promotion of software-enabled medical devices, especially when that promotion suggests a function that has not been approved and/or cleared by FDA for the device.Continue Reading FDA Maintains Focus on “Intended Use” for Software-Enabled Medical Devices
FDA To Require Demonstration of Cybersecurity Safeguards for Pre-Market Submissions of Certain Medical Devices
On March 29, 2023, and March 30, 2023, the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (“FDA”) issued a series of FAQs[1] and a guidance document[2] clarifying the agency’s intended implementation of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023 (the “Omnibus”), which amended Section 524B of the Food, Drug & Cosmetics Act (the “FD&C Act”) to require the demonstration of cybersecurity safeguards in pre-market submissions for certain medical devices.[3] Continue Reading FDA To Require Demonstration of Cybersecurity Safeguards for Pre-Market Submissions of Certain Medical Devices
FDA Expands Inspection Guidance to Apply to Device Manufacturers
On December 15, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a draft guidance, titled “Circumstances that Constitute Delaying, Denying, Limiting, or Refusing a Drug or Device Inspection” (the “Inspection Draft Guidance”), which clarifies the types of behaviors that FDA considers to be inappropriately delaying, denying, limiting, or refusing access to an inspection, each of which constitutes adulteration of a drug or device under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA).[1] The Inspection Draft Guidance clarifies certain behaviors described in FDA’s previous guidance on the subject (the “2014 Guidance”) and, most significantly, expands the previous guidance to apply to medical device manufacturers.Continue Reading FDA Expands Inspection Guidance to Apply to Device Manufacturers
FDA Delays Enforcement of UDI Reporting Requirements for Consumer Health Products
With a September 24, 2022 compliance date looming, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced that will delay enforcement of its requirement to submit Unique Device Identifier (UDI) data for low-risk consumer health products. Consumer health products, as described in the FDA guidance, include class 1 devices that are typically sold directly to consumers, such as digital health products and consumables. The FDA guidance extends the compliance date for data submission from September 24, 2022 to December 8, 2022, giving manufacturers of consumer health products more time to prepare their submissions.Continue Reading FDA Delays Enforcement of UDI Reporting Requirements for Consumer Health Products
Digital Health in the Metaverse: Three Legal Considerations
The metaverse has been described as the “next frontier” and the “new era” of healthcare. Although still a loosely defined and relatively broad term, the “metaverse” generally refers to a shared virtual environment accessed by individuals via the Internet. Individuals generally enter the metaverse through the following four technologies: virtual reality, augmented reality, mixed reality and extended reality. Continue Reading Digital Health in the Metaverse: Three Legal Considerations
OIG Advisory Opinion Alert: Yet Another Favorable Decision for Medical Device Manufacturers
On Thursday, March 16, the Office of the Inspector General for the Department of Health and Human Services (“OIG”) issued OIG Advisory Opinion (“AO”) No. 22-05, relating to subsidization of certain Medicare cost-sharing obligations in the context of a clinical trial involving medical devices (the “Proposed Arrangement”). This is the third AO in a recent series of AOs (see AO 21-17 on November 19, 2021 and AO 21-13 on October 4, 2021) focused on Medicare cost subsidies in a clinical trial setting for serious conditions that affect large portions of the population in the US. Like these other AOs, OIG found that while the Proposed Arrangement could generate fraud and abuse risks under both the Federal anti-kickback statute (i.e., Section 1128A(a)(7) and 1128B(b) of the Social Security Act (“Act”)) and the Beneficiary Inducements CMP (i.e., Section 1128A(a)(5) of the Act), the Proposed Arrangement nevertheless presented a minimal risk of fraud and abuse under the law on the facts presented. Medical device manufacturers should pay close attention to this trend when considering trial designs and patient populations.
Continue Reading OIG Advisory Opinion Alert: Yet Another Favorable Decision for Medical Device Manufacturers
Top 5 Legal Issues in Digital Health to Watch for in 2022
The digital health sector has seen tremendous growth and innovation over the past few years. This momentum introduces new complexities within the legal and regulatory landscape that is trying to…
Continue Reading Top 5 Legal Issues in Digital Health to Watch for in 2022
FDA Releases Guidance for Digital Health Tech Used in Clinical Investigations
On December 22, 2021, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a draft guidance for sponsors, investigators, and other interested parties on using digital health technologies (DHT) to acquire data remotely from participants in clinical investigations. DHTs (such as wearables and sensors) are playing a growing role in clinical research, accelerated by the need for decentralized clinical trials and remote patient monitoring during the COVID-19 pandemic. Though largely directed to study sponsors using DHTs, the guidance raises issues that developers and manufacturers of these technologies will want to be mindful of given the ways in which their products might be used in a broader clinical use case than originally anticipated. Comments on the draft guidance are due March 23, 2022. The full text of the guidance can be accessed here.
Continue Reading FDA Releases Guidance for Digital Health Tech Used in Clinical Investigations
New State Genetic Privacy Law Directed at Consumer Genetic Tests
Utah recently signed into law SB 227, creating the Genetic Information Privacy Act (GIPA). The law, which is anticipated to go into effect in May 2021, is aimed at protecting genetic data collected from direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing companies. Companies distributing DTC tests should evaluate their current data privacy policies and practices against the obligations the new Utah law imposes on data use and protection, including user consent, data security, and access and deletion rights, to ensure they are in a position to comply with the new law.
Continue Reading New State Genetic Privacy Law Directed at Consumer Genetic Tests