Close Close Comment Creative Commons Donate Email Add Email Facebook Instagram Facebook Messenger Mobile Nav Menu Podcast Print RSS Search Secure Twitter WhatsApp YouTube

The FDA Is Forcing the CDC to Waste Time Double Testing Some Coronavirus Cases

The FDA’s strict guidance on test confirmations is one of several obstacles that has slowed the federal government’s response to COVID-19. The FDA could change its rules to speed things up, but hasn’t.

Private testing for COVID-19 only recently got started at facilities like Northwell Health Labs in Lake Success, New York. (Andrew Theodorakis/Getty Images)

Update, March 17, 2020: On Sunday, March 15, the Food and Drug Administration revised its Emergency Use Authorization to no longer require public health laboratories to send their tests to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for confirmation.

ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they’re published.

A federal directive that’s supposed to speed up the response to a pandemic is actually slowing down the government’s rollout of coronavirus tests.

The directive, issued by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, requires that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, a sister agency, retest every positive coronavirus test run by a public health lab to confirm its accuracy. The result, experts say, is wasting limited resources at a time when thousands of Americans are waiting in line to get tested for COVID-19.

The duplicative effort is the latest obstacle that is slowing the federal response to COVID-19, which has infected more than 1,300 people and resulted in 38 deaths in the United States. Progress was already delayed because the CDC decided to make its own test rather than adopting the design endorsed by the World Health Organization. The test then didn’t work properly and had to be fixed. The problems were further compounded by delays in certifying tests by private laboratories as well as a shortage of supplies and raw materials used for testing.

On Feb. 4, the FDA, which regulates devices as well as drugs, released a document called an Emergency Use Authorization to govern the use of the test. The goal of the emergency authorization is to short-circuit the typically onerous regulatory review that the agency imposes on new diagnostic devices — a process that can take months to years.

In the face of an imminent outbreak, however, the stringently written EUA appears to have become more of a hindrance than a help. Because of the requirement that the CDC rerun tests conducted by public health labs, as of two weeks ago the CDC’s website was lagging in its tally because it was only reporting confirmed cases. The CDC is now reporting both presumptive positives, which have been tested only by local labs, as well as cases it has confirmed.

“This is the time when we need as many tests as we can very quickly, because we need to know what is happening in this country,” said Dr. Leana Wen, an emergency physician and former health commissioner for the city of Baltimore. “Right now we are in the dark about the degree of COVID-19 spread. It’s hard for us to proceed to do our work in public health without concrete information.”

The CDC says it is simply following the process set out by federal regulations, though it couldn’t say how many false positives, if any, have shown up in the verification process.

“The regulatory language of the EUA dictated that,” CDC spokesman Richard Quartarone said. “We have to follow the rules. If we don’t follow the rules, FDA could shut us down. That is a real thing.”

The CDC is designed to serve as a short-term bridge to widespread testing while it analyzes a new disease and makes sure diagnostic tests are working correctly before handing the role off to the private sector, Quartarone said. If duplication hadn’t been required, the CDC may have been able to help with more front-line testing before private-sector labs took over, he said.

The emergency authorization also slowed the process of tests offered by private labs, which became available last week. The FDA initially required private labs to copy the CDC’s test design and have the agency review their tests before allowing them to begin testing. It took more than three weeks and growing criticism for the FDA to update its guidelines to allow certain academic labs to start testing once they had validated their tests internally.

In response to questions, FDA spokeswoman Stephanie Caccomo referred a reporter to a speech by FDA Commissioner Stephen Hahn on March 7, in which he defended the agency’s process.

“In the U.S., we have policies in place that strike the right balance during public health emergencies of ensuring critical independent review by the scientific and public health experts and timely test availability,” Hahn said. “The CDC test is a high-quality test, and it’s important to remember that false negatives or positives can be detrimental to making sure we are treating patients early, without delay, and also not quarantining healthy individuals.”

Joshua Sharfstein, vice dean for public health practice and community engagement at Johns Hopkins’ School of Public Health, said the FDA’s high standards might have been appropriate for smaller outbreaks. The FDA issued EUAs for diagnostics during the 2014 Ebola crisis and in 2016 for the mosquito-borne Zika virus. The coronavirus, however, is moving too fast to maintain absolute control — and the FDA could have ordered up a more flexible process, Scharfstein said.

“If you were to go back in time and tell the FDA ’you’ve got a month to get a million tests ready,’ I imagine they wouldn’t have chosen this strategy,” said Sharfstein, who oversaw EUAs while he served as deputy commissioner of the FDA during the Obama administration.

Requiring confirmatory tests not only adds time to the process but also uses crucial chemicals needed to set up the tests. “You need some of the reagents that now are in short supply to prepare the tests,” said CDC Director Robert Redfield in a hearing before the House Oversight Committee on Thursday, explaining the difficulty in expanding capacity even as private labs received green lights to start testing.

Private labs need only get confirmation for their first five positive and first five negative clinical specimens, according to the FDA’s Feb. 29 guidance. Commercial giants like LabCorp and Quest Diagnostics say they are now able to run thousands of tests a day.

“We want them to come online, because we don’t have the manufacturing capacity; our system in place is not designed for that massive amount,” Quartarone said of the private labs. “In general, CDC testing is a drop in the bucket for the overall testing that happens.”

According to the American Enterprise Institute, as of Thursday afternoon, nationwide testing capacity was at about 20,695 people a day. California public and private labs accounted for 39% of capacity, and the CDC and public health labs together accounted for about 17% of available tests.

That’s only testing capacity, however. According to Redfield, actual testing is still hampered by shortages of essential equipment and manpower.


Update, March 13, 2020: After this story published, the FDA sent the following statement: “As FDA has demonstrated throughout this outbreak, we are being responsive and adaptable as this public health emergency evolves. We have provided significant support to CDC as they developed and distributed their tests, including providing regulatory relief when warranted. The confirmatory testing was requested by the CDC as part of their EUA. If CDC were to request removal of the confirmatory testing requirement, FDA will work expeditiously with CDC to do so. We have been engaged with the CDC at all times and have shown continued flexibility concerning their test authorization. This assistance and flexibility extends beyond just our work with CDC as we have engaged with multiple test developers.”

Filed under:

Protect Independent Journalism

ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that produces nonpartisan, evidence-based journalism to expose injustice, corruption and wrongdoing. We were founded ten years ago to fill a growing hole in journalism: newsrooms were (and still are) shrinking, and legacy funding models failing. Deep-dive reporting like ours is slow and expensive, and investigative journalism is a luxury in many newsrooms today — but it remains as critical as ever to democracy and our civic life. A decade (and five Pulitzer Prizes) later, ProPublica has built the largest investigative newsroom in the country. Our work has spurred reform through legislation, at the voting booth, and inside our nation’s most important institutions.

This story you’ve just finished was funded by our readers and we hope it inspires you to make a gift to ProPublica so that we can publish more investigations like this one that holds people in power to account and produces real change.

Your donation will help us ensure that we can continue this critical work. From the Trump Administration, criminal justice, health care, immigration and so much more, we are busier than ever covering stories you won’t see anywhere else. Make your gift of any amount today and join the tens of thousands of ProPublicans across the country, standing up for the power of independent journalism to produce real, lasting change. Thank you.

Donate Now

Portrait of Lydia DePillis

Lydia DePillis

Lydia DePillis covers trade and the economy.

Portrait of Caroline Chen

Caroline Chen

Caroline Chen covers health care for ProPublica. She is currently reporting on the coronavirus pandemic.

Latest Stories from ProPublica

Current site Current page