Oncocyte Corp

Our business, financial condition, results of operations and future growth prospects are subject to various risks, including those described in Item 1A “Risk Factors” of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2023, filed with the SEC on April 16, 2024, which we encourage you to review. Other than as noted below, there have been no material changes from the risk factors disclosed in our most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K.

If the FDA takes the position that any of our tests are not within the scope of its policy on enforcement discretion for laboratory-developed tests, or otherwise determines that it will seek to actively regulate one or more of our diagnostic tests, responding to such a regulatory position could lead to delays in commercialization, or (if encountered after commercialization) requirements to halt the commercial provision of our tests until FDA marketing authorization is obtained.

In May 2024, the FDA published a final rule that phases out its enforcement discretion for LDTs, unless exempt, and amends the FDA’s regulations to make explicit that IVDs are medical devices under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act ("FDCA"), including when the manufacturer of the diagnostic product is a laboratory. The American Clinical Laboratory Association and a private laboratory have filed lawsuits against the FDA to challenge its authority to regulate LDTs under this final rule. The full impact of this final rule and the existing (and any future) challenges against currently remains to be seen.

If the FDA were to ultimately regulate our tests as traditional IVDs, some or all of our tests may become subject to certain FDA medical device regulations, including, in some cases, pre-market review. If required, the regulatory marketing authorization process may involve, among other things, successfully completing additional clinical trials and submitting a pre-market clearance (510(k)) submission or filing a de novo or pre-market approval application with the FDA. If pre-market review and approval is required by the FDA for any of our tests, we may need to incur additional expenses or require additional time to seek it, or we may be unable to satisfy FDA standards, and our applicable tests may not be cleared or approved on a timely basis, if at all, and the labeling claims permitted by the FDA may not be consistent with our currently planned claims or adequate to support adoption of and reimbursement for our tests. Ongoing compliance with any applicable FDA medical device regulations to which we could become subject in connection with any of our tests that FDA may regulate as traditional IVDs would increase the cost of conducting our business, and subject us to inspection by, and potential enforcement of certain regulatory requirements, of the FDA, for example registration and listing, adherence to good manufacturing practices under the Quality System Regulation ("QSR"), and medical device reporting. Enforcement action for noncompliance with these requirements could range from warning or untitled letters to civil and criminal penalties, injunctions, product seizure or recall, import bans, restrictions on the conduct of our operations and total or partial suspension of production. Our laboratories are operating under CLIA and are not currently operating as registered device manufacturing facilities or in compliance with FDA’s QSR. Because these standards differ, we may face challenges establishing FDA-compliant quality systems or be unable to do so. If after commercialization under the LDT framework, our tests are allowed to remain on the market but there is uncertainty about the regulatory status of our tests, which is likely, given the current state of industry challenges to FDA’s final rule, including questions that may be raised if competitors object to our regulatory positioning as an LDT, we may encounter ongoing regulatory and legal challenges and related costs. Such challenges or related developments (for example if the labeling claims the FDA allows us to make are more limited than the claims we currently plan to make) may impact our commercialization efforts as orders or reimbursement may be less than anticipated. Any of these regulatory developments may cause our business to suffer.

If the FDA is successful in overcoming challenges to the final rule and ultimately regulates certain LDTs as intended under the final rule, our tests may be subject to certain additional regulatory requirements, the scope of which may vary from one test to another based on various considerations. Complying with the FDA’s requirements can be expensive, time-consuming, and subject us to significant or unanticipated delays. To the extent we are required to obtain premarket clearance or approval to perform or continue performing any of our tests, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to obtain such authorization. Even if we obtain regulatory clearance or approval where required, such authorization may not be for the intended uses that we believe are commercially attractive or are critical to the commercial success of our tests. Based on these and other considerations, the implementation of the FDA’s final rule on LDTs could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

We currently market certain IVDs that have not been cleared by the FDA in reliance on the regulatory exemption for IVDs intended for RUO, but if the FDA determines that our RUO tests do not meet the applicable requirements for exemption or have intended uses that are inconsistent with RUO tests, we may be required to suspend commercialization of such products until we can obtain the requisite FDA clearance and/or subject to FDA warning or untitled letters, seizure, injunction, fines, or other enforcement action.

Some of our tests are marketed for RUO, which allows us to sell such products without the premarket clearance that FDA requires for the marketing of traditional devices. An RUO product may not be marketed for clinical diagnostic use and must be labeled “For Research Use Only. Not for use in diagnostic procedures.” Products that are intended for research use only and are properly labeled as RUO are exempt from compliance with the FDA’s pre- and post-market requirements to which traditional devices are subject, including the requirement that the product be cleared or approved before commercialization and QSR requirements. However, merely including the required RUO labeling will not necessarily exempt the device from the FDA's 510(k) clearance, premarket approval, or other requirements if the circumstances surrounding the distribution of the product indicate an objective intent to market the product for clinical diagnostic use.

According to the FDA guidance, circumstances indicating manufacturer intent to market an in vitro device for diagnostic use may include written or verbal marketing claims regarding a product's clinical efficacy or performance in clinical applications, instructions for clinical interpretation, clinical information, product names, or descriptors that claim or suggest that the IVD product may be used for any clinical diagnostic use, including a clinical investigation that is not exempt from the FDA’s investigational device exemption regulations. Other indications include a manufacturer's provision of technical support for clinical validation or clinical applications or solicitation of business from clinical laboratories that do not conduct research activities, all of which could be considered evidence of intended uses that conflict with RUO labeling.

In general, if (i) evidence shows that one or more of our IVDs are inappropriately labeled RUO (but marketed for clinical diagnostic use), such test(s) will not qualify for an IDE exemption and will be deemed misbranded under the FDCA. Device manufacturers found in violation of the FDCA may be subject to a wide range of enforcement action, including warning letters, seizure, injunction, criminal prosecution, monetary penalties, and others.

We believe that our promotional activities for our RUO products fall within the scope of the applicable premarket exemptions for RUO tests and the FDA’s enforcement discretion, as described in its relevant guidance. However, the FDA could disagree and require us to (i) stop promoting our RUO devices unless/until we obtain FDA clearance or approval (among other possible outcomes). Any adverse determination in relation to our marketing of current or future products for RUO will likely have a material adverse impact on our business.