Senator Edward Kennedy (D-Massachusetts) proposed a piece of legislation before the United States Senate on 1 March 2007 called the â€œLaboratory Test Improvement Act.â€ The Act is proposed as a series of amendments to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
Sen. Kennedyâ€™s statement(pdf) before the Senate, found in the Congressional Record from this month, defines his goal as â€œ[ensuring] the quality of clinical tests used every day in hospitals and doctorsâ€™ offices across the country.â€ Additionally, he pointed out that the â€œtests are being used to diagnose illnesses, predict who is most susceptible to specific diseases, and identify persons who carry a genetic disease that they could pass on to their children.â€
On his website Sen. Kennedy posted a news release that clarified his position:
â€œThe legislation will mandate that all providers of â€œhomebrewâ€ laboratory tests provide the FDA with evidence that verifies their analytical and clinical validity. All of the information submitted to the FDA will be compiled into a database, which will subsequently be made available to the public on the Internet. Presently, an overwhelming majority of the laboratory tests employed by health care facilities are homebrew tests that have not been approved by the FDA. In some instances, homebrew tests are used to diagnose Huntingtonâ€™s disease and susceptibility to breast cancer. As such, the results of homebrew tests affect the lives of thousands of Americans and their families each and every year.â€
Sen. Smith (R-Oregon), co-sponsor of this Act and Ranking Member of the Senate Special Committee on Aging, chaired a hearing in 2006 entitled â€œAt Home DNA Tests: Marketing Scam or Medical Breakthrough?â€ that addressed the lack of regulation of â€œhomebrewâ€ genetic testing products.
So will this legislation affect the thousands of genetic genealogy tests sold by DNA laboratories in the
The Laboratory Test Improvement Act defines a â€œlaboratory-developed testâ€ as one that uses â€œanalytical methods developed by a laboratory to process a biological specimen, whether at 1 laboratory site or multiple sites, to report a test result to a health care practitioner, a patient, or a consumer; and includes an in vitro diagnostic product that the laboratory has modified, unless such modification requires preclearance or preapproval of such modified in vitro diagnostic product under this Act.â€
The Act specifically excludes:
1) â€œthe processing of a biological specimen to: a) determine paternity, b) aid in forensics, or c) conduct research if the result of the test is not reported to a health care provider, a patient, or a consumer;
2) An in vitro diagnostic product; or
3) An analyte specific reagent [defined in the Code of Federal Regulations].â€
The Act also states that laboratory-developed tests shall be classified as a â€œdeviceâ€ under section 201(h) of the FFDCA. Section 201(h) defines device as â€œan instrument, apparatus, implement, machine, contrivance, implant, in vitro reagent, or other similar or related article, including any component, part, or accessory, which is [among other things] intended for use in the diagnosis of disease or other conditions, or in the cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease, in manâ€¦â€
Based on the â€˜intentâ€™ of the legislation (suggested by Sen. Kennedyâ€™s press release and statements before the Senate) and the definitions contained in the Act, it is unlikely that tests offered for genetic genealogy will fall under the scope of the Laboratory Test Improvement Act.
It is possible that companies offering genetic genealogy testing might be forced to comply with the Laboratory Test Improvement Act in the future if the scope of their sequencing grows. As whole-genome sequencing becomes cheaper and cheaper, companies will want to offer many more options to their customers, including disease gene variants. After all, unless the mutation is spontaneous we inherited the variant from our ancestors. Already the media is filled with stories of whole families that possess a dangerous allele and are submitting their DNA for testing. The line between testing for genealogical purposes and for purely genetic purposes is fading. That being said, the Laboratory Test Improvement Act clearly does not forbid any of the testing described. New â€œhomebrewâ€ tests will be allowed to come onto the market without FDA review provided they a warning that they have not been FDA-cleared or â€“approved. Perhaps this could benefit consumers by preventing testing by companies who offer sub-par services.
The Text of the proposed legislation is available here. Here is a blog discussion of the legislation and a news article that mentions Genelex, a company that offers both genetic genealogy tests and disease gene screening.
What are your opinions on this topic?