FDA’s Latest on Emergency Diagnostics and a No-Frills Rescission of the LDT Rule

September 24, 2025

Reading Time : 2 min

On Tuesday, September 23, 2025, FDA published guidance titled “Consideration of Enforcement Policies for In Vitro Diagnostic Tests During a Section 564 Declared Emergency.” The guidance, a draft of which was published on May 6, 2024, specifies the factors that FDA intends to assess in deciding whether to issue an enforcement discretion policy with regard to in vitro diagnostics (IVD) manufacturers offering unapproved IVDs, among other devices, during a declared emergency. These factors include:

  • Public health need. FDA would consider the testing needs presented by the declared emergency, including an analysis of the authorized or approved tests available and the time sensitivity of the testing needs. The time sensitivity would be dependent on a variety of factors, including the transmissibility of the disease in question, as well as its morbidity and mortality.
  • Benefits and risks. This analysis would weigh the benefits of expedient access to testing (e.g., infection control) against the risks of using an unapproved or unauthorized test (e.g., risk of false result).
  • Alternatives. FDA will consider whether alternative approved or authorized IVDs might be used to diagnose the disease or condition and whether there is sufficient manufacturing capacity for these tests to meet the demand, among other factors.
  • Mitigations. FDA noted that it intends to consider manufacturer experience and participation in a government evaluation program such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Rapid Acceleration of Diagnostics (RADx) Tech program’s Independent Test Assessment Program (ITAP), along with other factors. 

FDA noted that it would consider the public health needs as well as the risks and benefits of the use of unapproved or unauthorized IVDs periodically during the declared emergency and that it would adjust its policy of enforcement discretion depending on the outcome of that analysis.

This follows the agency’s publication of a final rule on September 19th, revising the definition of IVD devices to reflect the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas’ final judgment in American Clinical Laboratory Association et al., v. FDA. In that case, the District Court vacated and set aside a rule that would have formally brought laboratory developed tests under FDA oversight (the LDT Rule). The rule published last week restores the definition of IVD devices to its pre-LDT Rule language (see 21 C.F.R. § 809.3(a)). While this simple rescission rule restores the regulations to their previous wording, it does not address how FDA interprets the court’s decision, which did not provide clear guidance on what, precisely, falls within the types of laboratory tests that fall outside the statutory device definition.

Share This Insight

Previous Entries

Eye on FDA

September 24, 2025

On Tuesday, September 23, 2025, FDA published guidance titled “Consideration of Enforcement Policies for In Vitro Diagnostic Tests During a Section 564 Declared Emergency.” The guidance, a draft of which was published on May 6, 2024, specifies the factors that FDA intends to assess in deciding whether to issue an enforcement discretion policy with regard to in vitro diagnostics (IVD) manufacturers offering unapproved IVDs, among other devices, during a declared emergency. These factors include:

...

Read More

Eye on FDA

September 23, 2025

Last week, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a proposed rule to revoke the color additive listing for Orange B, a synthetic dye historically used on the casings and surfaces of frankfurters and sausages. This action is part of the broader “Make America Healthy Again” (MAHA) initiative to phase out petroleum-based foods from the American food supply by the end of 2026 and efforts to modernize the agency’s regulations.

...

Read More

Eye on FDA

September 12, 2025

The White House’s Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) Commission, led by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., released its highly anticipated strategy outlining a multi-agency approach focused on addressing childhood chronic disease. The strategy builds on the Commission’s inaugural health assessment, a report which examined the rising rates of childhood chronic diseases in the country and identified four primary drivers: poor diet due to consumption of ultra-processed foods (UPFs), exposure to environmental chemicals; increased technological use; and overmedicalization. To combat these challenges, the strategy released on September 9, 2025, outlines a four-prong approach which provides further insight into the areas the administration sees as key areas of MAHA going forward: advancing research, realigning incentives, increasing public awareness and fostering private sector collaborations.

...

Read More

Eye on FDA

September 8, 2025

On September 3, 2025, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced Rare Disease Evidence Principles (RDEP) with processes aimed at providing greater predictability and facilitating the development and review of drugs intended to treat rare diseases with very small patient populations and significant unmet medical needs driven by a known genetic defect. In conjunction with the agency’s announcement of the new processes jointly proposed by the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) and Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), the agency also unveiled additional information regarding eligibility and the potential for post-marketing requirements for those sponsors who participate in it.

...

Read More

Eye on FDA

August 27, 2025

Food dye reform has been an area of focus for the Trump administration as part of its Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) initiative, giving momentum to an effort the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had already started by banning Red No. 3 for use in food and ingested drugs. FDA has continued to prioritize this work by taking actions to phase out the use of synthetic dyes and move to natural dyes since calling for these changes earlier this year, as discussed in our previous blog on the related announcement by the administration.

...

Read More

Eye on FDA

August 12, 2025

Last week, former Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner David Kessler submitted a citizen petition urging FDA to revoke the generally recognized as safe (GRAS) status of refined carbohydrates used in industrial food processing. The petition follows FDA’s and the United States Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) joint request for information (RFI) to establish a formal definition for ultra-processed foods (UPFs) and offers FDA a legal pathway to change the regulatory status of these ingredients.

...

Read More

Eye on FDA

August 6, 2025

On August 6, 2025, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) became the latest governmental agency to confirm that fluoropolymers are both safe and necessary. After an independent safety review of fluoropolymers in medical devices showed no conclusive evidence of health issues, FDA concluded that fluoropolymers are “very unlikely to cause toxicity” because of molecular size and further that they are essential for medical devices to function. As a result, “FDA’s evaluation is that currently there is no reason to restrict their continued use in devices.” This announcement will be a source of relief to the device and diagnostics industries.

...

Read More

Eye on FDA

July 25, 2025

On July 25, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), in collaboration with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), unveiled the highly anticipated joint request for information on ultra-processed foods (UPFs). Specifically, the administration is seeking information and data to help develop a uniform definition for UPFs in the U.S. food supply.

...

Read More

© 2025 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. This document is distributed for informational use only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Akin is the practicing name of Akin Gump LLP, a New York limited liability partnership authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 267321. A list of the partners is available for inspection at Eighth Floor, Ten Bishops Square, London E1 6EG. For more information about Akin Gump LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and other associated entities under which the Akin Gump network operates worldwide, please see our Legal Notices page.