Trust Magazine

The Theranos Problem Congress Must Still Solve—Patients Need Protection

On the record

In this Issue:

  • Spring 2022
  • A New Collaboration for Vast and Lasting Conservation
  • Big Ideas, Big Results
  • Courts Shifted Online During the Pandemic
  • Garibaldi Glacier
  • Global Public Opinion in an Era of Democratic Anxiety
  • Noteworthy
  • Return on Investment
  • Small Cities Worry Cybersecurity Money Won’t Reach Them
  • Suicide Is an Urgent Public Health Problem in America
  • The Theranos Problem Congress Must Still Solve
  • Where Rivers Meet the Sea
  • Why Veterans With GI Bill Benefits Still Take Out Student Loans
  • View All Other Issues
The Theranos Problem Congress Must Still Solve—Patients Need Protection
Nick Otto AFP via Getty Images

For most of its existence, the now-defunct biotech startup Theranos operated in so-called “stealth mode”—disclosing little about the science behind its blood-testing device while boldly claiming that it could deliver faster, more convenient, and cheaper diagnostic tests to millions of people anxious to know if they had diabetes, cancer, cardiovascular disease, or scores of other conditions.

In truth, Theranos’ testing device didn’t work as advertised, a fact the company managed to conceal from investors, regulators, and customers for years until whistleblowers and a journalist exposed the firm’s misconduct. Theranos was then forced to invalidate two years’ worth of blood tests for tens of thousands of patients, and, in January its CEO, Elizabeth Holmes, was found guilty on four charges of defrauding investors, facing up to 20 years in prison.

But even though Theranos’ leaders have been called to account, the loophole they exploited to avoid independent review of their devices remains wide open, and now Congress must act to close it.

Unfortunately, U.S. House of Representatives and Senate committee leaders have yet to take up a bipartisan bill, known as the Verifying Accurate Leading-edge IVCT Development (VALID) Act, that could plug the holes in testing oversight and ensure that diagnostic products are accurate before they’re used on patients.

When Congress authorized the Food and Drug Administration to regulate medical devices, including in vitro diagnostic tests, in 1976, the agency waived regulatory requirements for tests designed, manufactured, and used all in the same lab—known as lab-developed tests (LDTs). This approach made sense decades ago, when LDTs tended to be relatively simple and were intended for small patient populations; they were designed to detect rare conditions for which there were few or no other commercially available diagnostics. But as the Theranos experience has shown, today’s LDTs are often more complex, designed for conditions as widespread as cancer or COVID-19, created to compete with FDA-approved tests, and marketed nationally, in some cases for consumers to use in their homes without medical oversight.

If FDA had required Theranos to submit its LDTs for premarket review, as it does for other diagnostics, the agency might have been able to shield patients from harm. It could have kept Theranos products off the market and restricted the company’s unsupported marketing claims. And even if Theranos had been able to clear that initial FDA review, mandatory adverse event reporting could have enabled FDA to identify faulty tests sooner and recall them, if necessary.

But the public safety story here is not just a Theranos story. Other companies exploit the same regulatory gaps, and many people suffer after receiving false results from faulty LDTs that lead them to undergo the wrong treatment or forgo the right one.

Unfortunately, there’s little transparency in the LDT marketplace. As research from The Pew Charitable Trusts demonstrates, without FDA oversight before and after a test comes to market, or even a simple product registry, no one knows precisely how many LDTs are in use, let alone how often they fail or how many people they hurt.

That needs to change. It shouldn’t be left to whistleblowers and investigative journalists to identify LDT problems piecemeal after they occur; instead, patients and their health care providers deserve more information about the tests they rely on to diagnose life-changing and life-threatening conditions. And Congress needs to make it clear that oversight should lie with FDA.

The agency needs clear authority and resources to prevent harm; the track record shows that when it exercises its authority over diagnostics, patients and test-makers benefit alike. In the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, for instance, FDA exercised its “emergency use” authority to review 125 COVID-19 LDTs. It found serious “design or validation problems” in 82 of those tests. In most cases, FDA worked with developers to rectify the issues and bring the much-needed products to market.

In the past, some labs strongly objected to FDA oversight of LDTs, but since then they’ve worked with members of Congress to seek solutions through the VALID Act. Unlike earlier proposals, the bill has benefited from several rounds of substantive input from test manufacturers, clinical laboratories, and patient groups. And unlike previous debates around reform, there’s wide agreement across many labs and device manufacturers about VALID’s major provisions, with discussion focusing more on how regulatory oversight should be reformed—not whether it should be reformed.

The bill’s not perfect. It exempts too many devices from premarket review, and it doesn’t provide FDA with enough tools to take action against poor quality tests once they’re in use. Health committee leadership in Congress should work together to build on VALID’s framework and make it stronger, and as chair of the House committee, New Jersey Representative Frank Pallone can be a powerful voice. Congress can give FDA authority to review all diagnostics based on the risk they pose to patients before they reach the market and monitor their performance once in use.

This requires swift action. Congress has a window of opportunity to attach the VALID Act to another bill, a so-called “must-pass” measure on user fees for medical devices that lawmakers plan to approve in 2022.

The COVID-19 pandemic and the Theranos trial both demonstrate the urgency of the problem. The longer Congress waits, the longer patients will remain vulnerable to faulty tests. When it comes to medical tests, we need safety and sunlight, not stealth—and we need it now.

Liz Richardson directs The Pew Charitable Trusts’ health care products project.

This article originally appeared on on Jan. 12, 2022.

Why Veterans With GI Bill Benefits Still Take Out Student Loans Courts Shifted Online During the Pandemic
Trend Magazine

How Data Leads to Better Decisions

Quick View
Trend Magazine

Data and the scientific method aren’t just for the laboratory; they inform social science that leads to better public policy.

Diagnostic lab equipment
Diagnostic lab equipment
Speeches & Testimony

Calling for Stronger Federal Oversight of Clinical Tests

Quick View
Speeches & Testimony

The Pew Charitable Trusts and 10 patient health groups sent a letter to Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra on April 5 applauding the administration’s engagement on diagnostics reform.

The American flag is seen between the massive columns at the top of the steps to the U.S. Supreme Court on July 24, 2021 in Washington, DC.
The American flag is seen between the massive columns at the top of the steps to the U.S. Supreme Court on July 24, 2021 in Washington, DC.

New Federal Policies Seek More Data for Public Health

Quick View

The federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) released final updates Nov. 2 to policies detailing how the agency pays health care providers who treat Medicare patients.

Composite image of modern city network communication concept

Learn the Basics of Broadband from Our Limited Series

Sign up for our four-week email course on Broadband Basics

Quick View

How does broadband internet reach our homes, phones, and tablets? What kind of infrastructure connects us all together? What are the major barriers to broadband access for American communities?

Pills illustration
Pills illustration

What Is Antibiotic Resistance—and How Can We Fight It?

Sign up for our four-week email series The Race Against Resistance.

Quick View

Antibiotic-resistant bacteria, also known as “superbugs,” are a major threat to modern medicine. But how does resistance work, and what can we do to slow the spread? Read personal stories, expert accounts, and more for the answers to those questions in our four-week email series: Slowing Superbugs.