On 1 July 2026, the Rapporteur in the European Parliament’s Committee on Public Health (SANT) published his draft report (the Draft Report) in response to the Commission’s proposal to amend Regulation (EU) 2017/745 (MDR) and Regulation (EU) 2017/746 (IVDR) (the Commission Proposal). The details of the Commission Proposal are discussed in our December 2025 BioSlice blog post. The Draft Report contains over 130 suggested amendments to the Commission Proposal, giving an indication of what amendments the Parliament may target in the legislative process for the MDR/IVDR revision. The Report is therefore informative reading for industry on what amendments may ultimately be made to the MDR and IVDR.

The Draft Report, and the discussion of it in the SANT Committee, highlights that the Parliament is broadly supportive of the Commission’s attempts to promote a more proportionate regulatory framework. However, the proposed amendments would provide further simplification in some areas, while reintroducing obligations for manufacturers in others.

We discuss some of the key amendments proposed in the Draft Report below.

Continue Reading How will the EU Parliament shape the MDR/IVDR revision? Draft report indicates how Parliament may seek to amend Commission’s proposals

Since 12 September 2025, the EU Data Act (Regulation (EU) 2023/2854, the “EU Data Act”) has required manufacturers of connected products and providers of related services to make in-scope data accessible to users, whether through direct or indirect access mechanisms. On 12 September 2026, a further dimension of that obligation becomes applicable: new connected products and related services placed on the EU market after that date must be designed with direct access capabilities built in by default, where relevant and technically feasible. Because the obligation to provide direct access is explicitly not absolute, manufacturers that already offer users indirect access through a portal or account may find that the practical change is limited.

The September 2026 date is nonetheless a valuable opportunity for companies, including those in the life sciences sector, to review their compliance position: not only on access by design, but across the broader set of EU Data Act obligations that have been applicable for almost a year and are now increasingly attracting scrutiny from marketplaces, customers, and emerging national enforcement bodies.

Continue Reading The EU Data Act’s Access-by-Design Deadline: What Life Sciences Companies Need to Know Before September 2026

Welcome to the latest installment of Arnold & Porter’s Virtual and Digital Health digest. This digest covers key virtual and digital health regulatory and public policy developments during June and early July 2026 from the United Kingdom and European Union.

AI continues to be at the top of the agenda for regulators in Europe. The European Commission (EC) has been focused on preparing for the majority of the provisions in the AI Act to come into force this August. Among those provisions are the transparency requirements, and to assist organizations with compliance, the EC has published a voluntary Code of Practice on the marking and labeling of AI-generated content. Further, a Scientific Panel and an Advisory Forum have been appointed to advise the EC’s AI Office and national competent authorities on implementation and enforcement of the AI Act.

In the UK, we are seeing a continued commitment to regulating AI through guidance and codes of practice, as well as the provision of regulatory support through sandbox programs. The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), the data protection regulator, has published its plan for upcoming work in relation to AI, which sets out various plans for guidance and codes of practice. The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) continues its focus on regulatory sandboxes and recently reported the outcome of the second phase of the AI Airlock. It has also announced further AI sandboxes in order to accelerate the development of medicines and to allow innovators to test AI tools that have the potential to predict how medicines behave in the body, and another, which will be London-focused.

The key legislative development this month is that the EU Council has adopted its position on the first part of the Biotech Act, which, together with the European Commission’s draft, will form the basis of the trilogue discussions between the European Union (EU) institutions, hopefully leading to agreement on a finalized text. 

Continue Reading Virtual and Digital Health Digest – July 2026

On 12 August 2026, the EU Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2025/40) (the “PPWR”) becomes applicable. It replaces the long-standing Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive with a directly applicable, EU-wide regime governing the design, documentation, labelling and end-of-life management of virtually all packaging placed on the EU market. Some in the life sciences field may assume that medical device, IVD and pharmaceutical packaging sits outside general packaging rules. That assumption is misguided: the PPWR applies broadly, and the sector-specific exemptions it contains are narrow and conditional.

Non-compliance is not a minor administrative matter. Packaging that does not meet PPWR requirements cannot lawfully be placed on the EU market, and life sciences companies that fail to act risk losing EU market access for their products, regardless of whether those products themselves hold valid CE Certificates of Conformity under the MDR, IVDR or marketing authorisation under applicable pharmaceutical legislation.

Continue Reading The EU Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation: Why Life Sciences Companies Should Act Now

On 7 July 2026, the European Data Protection Board (“EDPB”) adopted its Guidelines 02/2026 on Anonymisation for public consultation (the “Guidelines”), replacing the Article 29 Working Party’s Opinion 05/2014 that served as one of the primary EU references on the topic for over a decade.

Since 2014, the legal landscape has, however, shifted considerably, most notably through the Court of Justice’s judgment in EDPS v SRB (Case C-413/23 P) (see our blog on that judgment), and the practical landscape even more so, with the proliferation of AI, large-scale data pooling, and cross-border research collaborations. For life sciences companies handling key-coded clinical data, safety reports, or real-world evidence, the Guidelines, once finalised and adopted, will set out a clear framework for determining when data is genuinely anonymous and therefore falls outside the GDPR’s scope.

Continue Reading EDPB Guidelines on Anonymisation: What Life Sciences Companies Need to Know

Welcome to the latest installment of Arnold & Porter’s Virtual and Digital Health Digest. This digest covers key virtual and digital health regulatory and public policy developments during May and early June 2026 from the United Kingdom and European Union.

May 2026 saw continued momentum across the European Union (EU) and United Kingdom (UK) toward modernizing and streamlining the regulatory landscape for digital health, with a particular focus on accommodating AI-enabled technologies while reducing unnecessary complexity. A central development was the provisional agreement on the Digital Omnibus package, which seeks to simplify the application of the EU AI Act by clarifying overlaps with sector-specific legislation, deferring key obligations, and introducing more proportionate requirements.

In parallel, regulators on both sides of the Channel are advancing reforms to ensure that medical device frameworks remain fit for purpose in an increasingly software-driven and data-centric environment. In the EU, the activation of key European Database on Medical Devices (EUDAMED) modules marks a major step toward enhanced transparency and traceability, while ongoing discussions on the Medical Devices Regulation 2017/745 (MDR)/In Vitro Diagnostic Regulation 2017/746 (IVDR) revisions highlight a strong policy drive toward simplification and better integration of AI. In the UK, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency’s (MHRA) proposed pre-market reforms and broader thinking on AI regulation signal a shift toward more flexible, lifecycle-based oversight, with greater emphasis on post-market monitoring and innovation support.

Data governance and cybersecurity also remain high on the agenda. Industry and regulators alike are emphasizing the need for coherent, proportionate frameworks that avoid duplication while enabling innovation, particularly in light of expanding AI use cases and global supply chains. Together, these developments reflect a broader trend toward risk-based, innovation-friendly regulation, coupled with increasing expectations around transparency, accountability, and data protection in digital health.

Continue Reading Virtual and Digital Health Digest – June 2026

Regulatory activity in the EU and UK over the past month has focused on AI in health care, health data access, and digital innovation frameworks. Recent regulatory developments in the EU and UK point to a decisive shift from high level policy ambition to the practical mechanics of enabling AI driven health care, with particular emphasis on health data governance, regulatory pilots, and institutional readiness.

At the EU level, attention is increasingly focused on building durable frameworks to support innovation while maintaining regulatory confidence. The European Medicines Agency is preparing to pilot enhanced regulatory support for breakthrough medical devices and in vitro diagnostics (IVD), an initiative expected to shape future reforms of the EU medical device and IVD regimes. In parallel, the European Commission has taken further steps to operationalize the European Health Data Space (EHDS) through new implementing rules on the governance of the European Health Data Space Board, signaling a move from legislation to execution. The European Data Protection Board (EDPB) has also issued draft guidelines on the application of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) to scientific research, offering long awaited clarification on lawful bases, consent models, and secondary use of data, issues that are central to data intensive research and AI development and likely to influence practice across Member States once finalized.

In the UK, scrutiny has centered on whether existing data and regulatory structures are capable of supporting personalized medicine and AI at scale. Evidence to the House of Lords Science and Technology Committee highlighted the UK’s rich but underexploited health data assets and the persistence of access barriers since the pandemic, with witnesses pointing to fragmented governance and delays in data access as ongoing constraints. At the same time, the expansion of the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency’s (MHRA) AI Airlock program, continued work by the National AI Commission, and targeted support for AI driven drug discovery reflect a more iterative, test and learn approach to AI regulation, focused on post market oversight rather than wholesale reform.

Continue Reading Virtual and Digital Health Digest – May 2026

The MHRA’s proposed rare disease therapies regulatory framework (“the Proposed Framework”) represents an ambitious attempt to redesign medicines regulation around the realities of rare disease development.

On 21 May 2026, the MHRA launched its consultation on the Proposed Framework, representing a significant step in the UK’s ambition to become a global leader in the development of therapies for rare diseases.

The initiative reflects the scale of unmet need: around 1 in 17 people will be affected by a rare disease during their lifetime, equating to over 3.5 million people in the UK, yet only around 5% of rare diseases have an approved treatment.

The consultation acknowledges that traditional regulatory approaches, designed for common diseases with large patient populations and well‑established trial paradigms, are often unsuitable for rare disease therapies.  Against this backdrop, the Proposed Framework aims to enable earlier patient access to promising therapies, reduce development burden, and incentivise innovation, while maintaining the UK’s standards of safety, quality and efficacy.

The MHRA requests responses from industry, patient organisations and other stakeholders. The consultation closes on 30 July 2026.

Continue Reading UK MHRA consults on a new regulatory framework for rare disease therapies

Welcome to the latest installment of Arnold & Porter’s Virtual and Digital Health Digest. This digest covers key virtual and digital health regulatory and public policy developments during March and early April 2026 from the the United Kingdom, and European Union.

Regulatory activity in the EU and UK over the past month has focused on accelerating the alignment of digital, AI, and life sciences regulatory frameworks, alongside increasing scrutiny of data governance and market readiness for emerging technologies.

At the EU level, work to simplify and streamline EU AI-related legislation has advanced, with the Council of the European Union and European Parliament having adopted their positions on the European Commission’s (EC) Digital Omnibus reforms, and now entering trilogue negotiations on the final text. In parallel, MedTech Europe published its response to the EC consultation on the simplification of the EU AI rules as part of the Digital Omnibus, calling for clearer integration between the AI Act and other sectoral legislation, as well as extended implementation timelines. Separately, the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) and European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) issued a joint opinion on the proposed European Biotech Act, emphasizing the need for clearer safeguards, harmonized legal bases for processing clinical data, and strong protections when health and genetic data are used in biotech and AI contexts.

In the UK, developments have focused on the role of AI-enabled innovation within the health care system. A new parliamentary inquiry into personalized medicine and AI will examine ongoing challenges and barriers to National Health Service (NHS) adoption of new technologies, including procurement, digital infrastructure limitations, and system fragmentation. At the same time, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) has secured multi year funding to expand its AI Airlock Program to support the development of more ambitious AI medical devices. These initiatives signal a continued policy commitment to embedding digital and AI driven innovation into health care delivery and to strengthening the regulatory environment required to support safe deployment at scale.

Continue Reading Virtual and Digital Health Digest – April 2026

The MHRA has launched a consultation on proposed updates to the definition of gene therapy medicinal products (“GTMPs”) under the UK Human Medicines Regulations 2012 (“HMRs”). The current definition was originally developed in 2007, and was based on a smaller range of technologies. It is no longer considered to reflect the full range of modern gene therapy technologies now available, including therapies involving synthetic genetic material, new forms of genome editing, and highly engineered cells and tissues. This means there may not be a clear path to market for these technologies under the current legislation.

The proposals aim to address these limitations and align the regulatory framework with current scientific developments. The proposed reforms represent a targeted shift towards a more technology-neutral and mechanism-based approach. The proposals do not change the approval process, classification of existing products, or applicable safety and efficacy standards.

The MHRA is seeking input from stakeholders on whether the proposals are appropriate, proportionate and workable, including whether the revisions cover the correct categories of products, and whether these would cause any unintended consequences or operational challenges. The consultation is open until 22 June 2026 and feedback is requested in the form of a survey. Responses can be submitted online here.

Below, we outline the background, the key proposed changes, and the regulatory considerations that have shaped MHRA’s proposals.

Continue Reading MHRA launches consultation on modernising the definition of gene therapy medicinal products