The U.S. FDA’s October 2025 draft guidance for quality management system information in premarket filings may have struck some observers as an example of regulatory overreach, given the robust opposition to several key aspects of the draft on the parts of the Advanced Medical Technology Association and the Medical Device Manufacturers Association.

The U.S. FDA finalized the latest edition of its premarket cybersecurity guidance, but the agency is of the view that any device with software is subject to the terms of the guidance even though the statute would seem to exempt device software that lacks connectivity.

Michelle Tarver, director of the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH), covered several programmatic areas in a May 1 trade association meeting, such as the CDRH early alert program.

Medicare coverage of digital mental health therapies has traditionally been lacking, but the final Medicare physician fee schedule for 2025 added three new codes to deal with the coverage gap.

The draft Medicare physician fee schedule for calendar year 2025 provoked a strong backlash from physician societies due to a net cut in physician pay. Device makers have their own concerns, including the latest in a series of controversies over coverage of skin substitutes.

While the U.S. FDA’s final rule for regulation of lab-developed tests (LDTs) has yet to emerge, there is some reason to expect the rule will be met with litigation from clinical lab associations. The FDA’s Jeff Shuren said in remarks to this year’s meeting of the Medical Device Manufacturers Association that there is a legitimate problem with the accuracy of many LDTs, adding that while stakeholders are at liberty to question the FDA’s rulemaking, the agency’s experience in this area indicates that the question of LDT reliability is not up for debate.

One of the problems with the European Union’s Artificial Intelligence Act is that it spans all sectors of the E.U. economy, an approach that Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) suggested is less than optimal in remarks to this year’s meeting of the Medical Device Manufacturers Association. Nonetheless, Cassidy said some in the Senate are keen to pass legislation without taking proper stock of the lack of congressional expertise, which runs the risk that hasty legislation may create more problems than it solves.

The U.S. Medicare program for coverage of U.S. FDA-designated breakthrough devices has gone through some significant alterations over the past few years, but there is legislation on Capitol Hill that would codify this program at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Mark Leahey, president and CEO of the Medical Device Manufacturers Association (MDMA), told BioWorld that one of the sources of drag on this kind of legislation is how the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) scores the legislation, a problem that might not be resolved until CBO works through other legislation.

Medical device companies and trade associations alike have been clamoring for some time for a leaner path to Medicare coverage for their more novel product offerings, a message that may be gaining traction.