Bradley Merrill Thompson, a Member of the Firm in the Health Care and Life Sciences practice, in the Washington, DC, office, was quoted in an article titled "FDA Health IT Deregulation Bill Coming to the Senate."

Following is an excerpt:

A Senate bill to restrict FDA's oversight of health information technology is expected to be introduced next week, according to two industry sources with close connections to policy developments on digital health issues. A copy of the bill obtained by "The Gray Sheet" shows it to be similar in many of its particulars to the SOFTWARE Act, a companion piece of legislation introduced in the House by Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., late last year. (See "Bipartisan House Bill Introduced To Curb FDA Health IT Oversight" — "The Gray Sheet," Oct. 23, 2013.)

The Senate bill will be called the PROTECT Act. It is expected to be introduced by Sen. Deb Fischer, R-Neb., with a bipartisan cosponsor.

The controversy animating the bill arises from a perception among some health IT stakeholders that FDA's approval process is too slow and unwieldy for health IT and mobile medical apps; the draft bill's "sense of Congress" section states that "clinical and health software innovation cycles evolve and move faster than the existing regulatory approval process."

The bill also looks askance at FDA's recent mobile medical apps guidance. Despite the agency's argument that the final guidance loosened FDA's grip over the sector, the draft bill language argues that the guidance does the opposite, stating that the agency has "sought to expand its enforcement discretion by regulating the dynamic mobile health and mobile application market" and in so doing has "failed to defer to Congress' stated preference" expressed in the FDA Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA) of 2011. ?...

Bradley Merrill Thompson, head of the mHealth Regulatory Coalition, responded to language in the draft PROTECT Act in an email to "The Gray Sheet." Thompson has been a critic of the SOFTWARE Act.

"I think the drafters of the PROTECT act tried to solve some of the technical problems [of the SOFTWARE Act] and they solved a few, but not the biggest and most important ones," Thompson wrote.

"The biggest issue with both the SOFTWARE act and the PROTECT act is that it would deregulate certain standalone software used for such things as guiding therapeutic decision-making. For example, under both acts, a radiation dosage calculator would be removed from FDA regulation even though there is considerable risk in using such a program."

The decision to place clinical software in NIST's jurisdiction while sidelining FDA also bothered Thompson: "That's just a terrible idea."

"FDA has a lot of experience in this area; they also have statutory authority that would be useful to regulating certain types of high risk [health IT]."

Thompson also felt the criticisms of FDA and its statutory authority embodied in the bill were off-the-mark. In particular — due to Thompson's experience serving on the FDASIA workgroup — the charge concerning the workgroup's report rankled. "We indicated that there were some areas of the 'written law' that needed to be changed. But that was a reference to guidance, not statute," Thompson wrote. "The working group never recommended statutory change." Thompson pointed out that he wrote the section in question of the workgroup report.

"This legislation suffers from the same fundamental flaws that the SOFTWARE act does and people on Capitol Hill did not seem to be listening to any but a few voices," Thompson concludes.

Jump to Page

Privacy Preference Center

When you visit any website, it may store or retrieve information on your browser, mostly in the form of cookies. This information might be about you, your preferences or your device and is mostly used to make the site work as you expect it to. The information does not usually directly identify you, but it can give you a more personalized web experience. Because we respect your right to privacy, you can choose not to allow some types of cookies. Click on the different category headings to find out more and change our default settings. However, blocking some types of cookies may impact your experience of the site and the services we are able to offer.

Strictly Necessary Cookies

These cookies are necessary for the website to function and cannot be switched off in our systems. They are usually only set in response to actions made by you which amount to a request for services, such as setting your privacy preferences, logging in or filling in forms. You can set your browser to block or alert you about these cookies, but some parts of the site will not then work. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable information.

Performance Cookies

These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources so we can measure and improve the performance of our site. They help us to know which pages are the most and least popular and see how visitors move around the site. All information these cookies collect is aggregated and therefore anonymous. If you do not allow these cookies we will not know when you have visited our site, and will not be able to monitor its performance.