Morgan N. Greenleafaf,
Gregory L. Damhorst
ab,
Eric M. Vogelag,
Greg S. Martin
ac and
Wilbur A. Lam
*adef
aThe Atlanta Center for Microsystems-Engineered Point-of-Care Technologies, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
bDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, USA
cDivision of Pulmonary, Allergy, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine, Department of Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, USA
dDivision of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology, Department of Pediatrics, Aflac Cancer Center and Blood Disorders Service of Children's Healthcare of Atlanta, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA
eWallace H. Coulter Department of Biomedical Engineering, Emory University and Georgia Institute of Technology, Emory University and Georgia Institute of Technology, USA. E-mail: Wilbur.lam@emory.edu
fGeorgia Clinical and Translational Science Alliance, USA
gSchool of Materials Science and Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 30332, USA
First published on 25th September 2025
This article explores the development and commercialization of Lucira Health's innovative at-home molecular diagnostic test, which detects influenza A or B and SARS-CoV-2. Launched amidst the urgent demand for accessible testing solutions, Lucira's product represented a significant breakthrough, becoming the first over-the-counter combination test authorized by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The narrative tracks Lucira's journey from its origins in microfluidics at the University of California-Berkeley, through development challenges, business success and failure. It also contrasts the distinct motivations and technical challenges of pre-pandemic versus pandemic era diagnostics, emphasizing test-to-treat strategies versus rapid results for containment. Despite early successes, Lucira faced insurmountable regulatory and financial hurdles, culminating in bankruptcy just days before FDA authorization. The case offers critical insights into diagnostics product development, regulatory navigation, product diversification, and strategic risk management in push towards home and point of care diagnostics.
The NIH-funded Atlanta Center for Microsystems Engineering POC Technologies (ACME POCT) is focused on microsystems-based and microfluidics-based diagnostics. The center's experience with the Rapid Acceleration of Diagnostics (RADx) program to speed the development, validation, and commercialization of innovative SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care and home based tests has brought the ACME POCT team into contact with amazing leaders of diagnostic technology companies. This experience has taught the team tremendously about the business and technology of microfluidics commercialization. As such, we aim to disseminate this knowledge to our microfluidics community by publishing a series of “lessons learned” case studies focused on the technical, clinical validation, regulatory, and commercialization lessons that led to company success or company failure. Our third case in this series discusses the development and commercialization of the Lucira Covid and Covid/flu combination home tests. ACME POCT is co-directed by Wilbur Lam, MD, PhD, Greg Martin, MD, MSc and Eric Vogel, PhD. |
What follows is an account of the events that led to February 2023 in three acts: act one will cover the creation of the Lucira test product and company, act two will discuss the difference between pre-pandemic and pandemic era testing objectives, act three will cover the regulatory approval of the combo test, and finally we end with an epilogue and discussion. Throughout, we highlight the business strategy of diagnostics and provide advice for future diagnostic developers.
![]() | ||
Fig. 1 Self-priming, self-contained, tether-free SIMBAS (A) integrates volume metering, plasma separation from whole-blood, multiple biomarker detection, and suction chambers for fluid propulsion. (B) (1) Cross section of device operation: (2) storage in low pressure, e.g. vacuum package; (3) within 2 min of removing the device from vacuum conditions and placing a 5 mL whole-blood sample on the inlet, degas-driven flow propels the sample into the device; (4) as the whole-blood passes over the filter trench, blood cells sediment gravitationally and are filtered while plasma flows into the channel; (5) plasma-based proteins are detected as the plasma flows across the biomarker detection zone; (6) suction chamber regulates the total volume of plasma analyzed and stops the flow before the trench filters are overfilled. Reproduced from ref. 3 with permission from the Royal Society of Chemistry, Copyright 2011. |
The goal of the company was to bring molecular level sensitivity to the home in a disposable form factor, first starting with diagnosis of common sexually-transmitted infections (STIs) caused by the bacteria Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae (CT/NG). The company's goals were specific: molecular level sensitivity was important to accurately detect the target pathogens but also because the “test to treat” paradigm was meant to facilitate early detection (at lower pathogen loads) so that treatment could be sought by the patient, curbing the spread of STIs. Further, the company was focused on disposable tests because they did not believe infectious disease diagnosis would ever be a “lifestyle product” in which a dock/cassette model would be better suited. Thus, the company was guided by these product requirements: a disposable and highly sensitive molecular test for use in the home.
Blue Ocean Strategy: How to Create Uncontested Market Space and Make the Competition Irrelevant by W. Chan Kim and Renee Mauborgne.4
Blue Ocean Strategy emphasizes creating new, untapped markets (“blue oceans”) rather than competing in crowded, established industries (“red oceans”). The strategy aims to generate demand by offering innovative products or services that redefine the market, often through differentiation (e.g. molecular sensitivity at home). While perhaps unintentional, Lucira focused on two blue oceans, the molecular home testing market and the home market for infectious diseases, neither of which were crowded with competitors yet.
Technical innovations required to create the Lucira home test included microfluidic advancements and optoelectronic development and integration. As the technology moved beyond the proof of concept stage, one key change was moving from fluorescent to colorimetric readout.5 This reduced device cost and allowed the product to be disposable. In addition, while originally the team designed the microfluidics using polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) which is ubiquitous in microfluidics development, the company moved away from this material because of its lack of reproducibility at scale. PDMS requires a slow manufacturing process with many steps that are hard to replicate exactly. Moving away from PDMS required the team to replace the degas-driven fluid flow from the original product with a pressure driven flow method with electrically driven pumps (Table 1).
First filing date | Patent title | Technical innovation |
---|---|---|
2014-04-24 | Colorimetric detection of nucleic acid amplification | Colorimetric readout |
2016-03-14 | Devices and methods for biological assay sample preparation and delivery | Pressure driven fluid flow |
2016-03-14 | Devices and methods for modifying optical properties | Optoelectronic development and integration |
The second phase of development was focused on sample collection. After initially focusing on CT/NG, the team decided this regulatory path was too difficult to bring a product to market. The team pivoted to Influenza. The standard nasopharyngeal (NP) swab is difficult for an untrained individual to collect, and therefore not appropriate for home use. The team performed a study comparing NP swabs, midturbinate (MT) swabs, and anterior nasal swabs for accuracy and discomfort6 and found that MT swab sensitivity for detecting influenza (A or B) was 98% (95% CI 94.25% to 99.65%) compared to NP with significantly reduced discomfort.
In phase three, the company focused on usability and human factors. The company hired a consumer product expert and conducted hundreds of usability studies. One key change was moving from an LCD display to a very simple LED based display which was easier for users to interpret and further reduced the product's cost.
The final product platform which can support multiple RNA targets utilizes RT-LAMP to detect viral RNA in an all-in-one test kit. The product creates an amplification reaction that induces a color change of halochromic agents which is detected by optoelectronic components and analyzed by an onboard microprocessor. Results are displayed to the user via LED in as little as 11 minutes for a positive and up to 30 minutes for negative (Fig. 2).
![]() | ||
Fig. 2 Schematic of Lucira device patent. Reproduced from ref. 7 with permission Frank Myers, Copyright 2020. |
Throughout the development of the Lucira test, the company raised substantial capital (>$284 M) from both dilutive and non-dilutive sources (Table 2).
Year | Type | Direct | Indirect | Total | Dilutive/non-dilutive |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2012 | NIH | $148![]() |
$148![]() |
Non-dilutive | |
2014 | SBIR/STTR | $295![]() |
$295![]() |
Non-dilutive | |
2015 | SBIR/STTR | $295![]() |
$295![]() |
Non-dilutive | |
2015 | Y Combinator | $120![]() |
$120![]() |
Dilutive | |
2015 | Series A | $12![]() ![]() |
$12![]() ![]() |
Dilutive | |
2016 | SBIR/STTR | $656![]() |
$656![]() |
Non-dilutive | |
2017 | SBIR/STTR | $651![]() |
$651![]() |
Non-dilutive | |
2017 | SBIR/STTR | $668![]() |
$668![]() |
Non-dilutive | |
2018 | SBIR/STTR | $722![]() |
$722![]() |
Non-dilutive | |
2019 | Contract | $21![]() ![]() |
$21![]() ![]() |
Non-dilutive | |
2019 | Series B | $32![]() ![]() |
$32![]() ![]() |
Dilutive | |
2020 | SBIR/STTR | $729![]() |
$269![]() |
$999![]() |
Non-dilutive |
2020 | Series C | $58![]() ![]() |
$58![]() ![]() |
Dilutive | |
2021 | SBIR/STTR | $738![]() |
$252![]() |
$991![]() |
Non-dilutive |
2021 | IPO | $153![]() ![]() |
$153![]() ![]() |
Dilutive | |
2022 | SBIR/STTR | $730![]() |
$202![]() |
$932![]() |
Non-dilutive |
Total | $284![]() ![]() |
Influenza medication | Administration guidelines |
---|---|
Oseltamivir | Therapy should begin within 48 hours from onset of signs or symptoms. Not recommended for treatment of severe or progressive influenza or patients with disease severe enough to warrant hospitalization, due to lack of data9 |
Zanamivir | Therapy should begin within 48 hours from onset of signs or symptoms. Not recommended for treatment of severe or progressive influenza or patients with disease severe enough to warrant hospitalization, due to lack of data9 |
Peramivir | 600 mg as a single dose; initiate within 2 days of onset of symptoms of influenza. Due to insufficient data on use of peramivir for treatment of hospitalized patients with influenza, only consider for patients who cannot tolerate or absorb oral or enterically-administered oseltamivir due to gastric stasis, malabsorption, or GI bleeding9 |
Baloxavir marboxil | Single dose within 48 hours of onset of influenza symptoms9 |
In addition to guiding antiviral therapy, influenza diagnostics were used to prevent unnecessary antibiotic or antiviral treatment, and outbreak control in high-risk populations (nursing homes, hospitals).
Test | Analytical performance | Clinical performance | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sensitivity | Note | PPA | 95% CI | NPA | 95% CI | |||
Lucira COVID-19 All-In-One Test Kit | 2700 | GE per swab | 94.1 | 85.5 | 98.4 | 98 | 89.4 | 99.9 |
BinaxNOW™ COVID-19 Ag Card Home Test | 140.6 | TCID50 per mL | 81.6 | 73.7 | 88 | 98.3 | 95.6 | 99.5 |
QuickVue At-Home OTC COVID-19 Test | 19![]() |
TCID50 per mL | 83.5 | 74.9 | 89.6 | 99.2 | 97.2 | 99.8 |
Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 | 0.02 | PFU mL−1 | 97.8 | 88.4 | 99.6 | 95.6 | 85.2 | 98.8 |
ID NOW COVID-19 2.0 | 500 | Copies per swab | 93.3 | 89.5 | 96.1 | 98.5 | 97.2 | 99.3 |
Sofia SARS Antigen FIA | 113 | TCID50 per mL | 96.7 | 83.3 | 99.4 | 100 | 97.9 | 100 |
BD Veritor™ System for Rapid Detection of SARS-CoV-2 | 140 | TCID50 per mL | 84 | 67 | 93 | 100 | 98 | 100 |
In this environment, antigen lateral flow assays had distinct advantages. The tests are low cost to manufacture and distribute at massive scale and relatively easy to operate by the public in a home environment. In addition, the government provided billions of tests free to the public through the public mail system.
In contrast to behavioral motivations in pre-pandemic time (“do I need treatment?”), now the focus is on, “am I negative?” Consumers seeking negative test results for travel, to attend events, or see relatives prioritized affordable and accessible tests, which generally were highly specific, even if at the expense of sensitivity. In this wartime environment, the highly sensitive but more expensive Lucira COVID-19 test was popular with specific adopter groups including the highly educated and communities with specific risks (e.g. weakened immune system, cancer treatment), but not the broader public. Lucira had designed and developed a product for a pre-pandemic world – testing for influenza with different diagnostic requirements – than what a pandemic era COVID-19 diagnostic required.
The company's business plan called for a spring submission to the FDA, ramp up manufacturing to meet the contract volume commitments through the summer, then gain authorization in the fall in time to meet the demand of the winter Influenza season in the United States. This plan appeared to be working as their contract manufacturer Jabil ramped up production in the Dominican Republic and Health Canada authorized the combo test on August 11th 2022 however the Canadian market is small compared to the United States.13
In September 2022, Lucira heard back from the FDA and it was not good news. The agency was concerned about the toxicity of a chemical used in the buffer solution (guanidine hydrochloride) which could be ingested by users. During the development of the COVID test, Lucira worked collaboratively with the FDA and received clear and straightforward guidance. However, guidance on the combination product was less clear. Thinking the FDA required data to demonstrate low risk, the company undertook additional toxicology studies at great expense. But in fact, the agency required the chemical to be removed from the buffer completely.
By this time, the company was under tremendous financial strain with significant perishable inventory building up in storage that could not be sold. The company raced to redesign the assay, moving the chemical from the buffer solution into the sealed portion of the assay, removing the risk of ingestion. In a stepwise fashion, the agency authorized the Lucira combo test for CLIA waived sites (POC) on November 22 2022; however, this did not help the company because they were focused on the OTC market and had aligned all their marketing, sales, and distribution towards this effort.
On February 24th 2023, the FDA authorized the Lucira combo test for at-home use just two days after the company declared bankruptcy. While announcing the EUA for the combo test,14 Lucira President and CEO Erik Engelson cited “what became a protracted authorization cycle time” and lack of clarity when authorization would come “despite working closely with FDA”. In a rare public statement,15 the FDA's director of the Center for Devices and Radiological Health pushed back, citing both “risk to consumers due to a toxic substance identified in one of the test components” and a lack of clinical data in original submission. “In addition, the EUA request included only 9 positive influenza A clinical samples – an amount we found was insufficient to adequately determine test performance and support authorization by the FDA”.
However, focusing on a single product has high risks, as shown by the Lucira case. Lucira focused solely on the home market for highly sensitive tests for covid and flu. When their product launch ran into delays, the company had no alternatives to raise revenue and were forced into bankruptcy.
Another lens to view the role of luck and timing in Lurica's success and failure is through diffusion of innovations theory popularized by Everett Rogers.19 Diffusion of Innovation Theory examines how ideas and technologies are spread through people and markets and contains four categories that influence the spread: the innovation, communication channels, time, and the social system. The people, or adopters, of the technology are categorized into innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority, and laggards (Fig. 4).
Lucira succeeded in spreading their technology to innovators and early adopters, but were not able to cross into the early majority. Crossing into the early majority is sometimes referred to as “crossing the chasm”20 and requires pivoting the marketing and positioning of the product for a set of adopters with different priorities than the existing adopters. An analysis of the factors that influence adopters decisions shows why (Table 5):
Factor | Application to Lucira adoption |
---|---|
Compatibility | Before the pandemic, testing for respiratory diseases at home was very uncommon and compatible with consumer habits, insurance/payer markets, or even clinical workflows. During the pandemic, respiratory disease testing at home become much more compatible |
Trialability | Consumers must buy the kit making trialability low. Given the relatively higher cost of the Lucira kit, this reduced trialability compared to lower cost alternatives |
Relative advantage | The Lucira test had clear relative advantage in speed to result (compared to lab based PCR) and sensitivity (compared to home antigen tests). These relative advantages were most pronounced during the pandemic and reduced in the post-pandemic era |
Observability | Home testing is a low observability activity |
Simplicity/complexity | Relatively higher compared to antigen tests |
Lucira was able to build a market in innovators and early adaptors such as high-risk (e.g. immunocompromised) individual and technology or science enthusiasts but the jump to the early majority market was not possible as the pandemic waned and the relative advantage of the technology was reduced.
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2025 |