PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 28, 2013
Caroline Pryce Walker Conquer Childhood Cancer Reauthorization Act - Amends the Public Health Service Act to reauthorize through FY2018 cancer research programs under the Caroline Pryce Walker Conquer Childhood Cancer Act of 2008.
Replaces the current pediatric cancer research and awareness grant program carried out by the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) with a comprehensive children's cancer biorepositories program.
Authorizes the Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to make awards to eligible applicants to build upon existing initiatives to collect biospecimens and clinical and demographic information (including date of diagnosis, age at diagnosis, and patient's gender, race, and ethnicity) for at least 90% of all children, adolescents, and young adults with cancer in Comprehensive Children's Cancer Biorepositories for the purpose of achieving a better understanding of the cause of such cancers and the effects of treatments.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Permits award amounts to be used to: (1) acquire, preserve, and store high quality, donated biospecimens and associated clinical and demographic information on children, adolescents, and young adults diagnosed with cancer in the United States; (2) maintain a secure searchable database for scientists and qualified health care professionals to research such biospecimens and data; and (3) make available and distribute such biospecimens and data to researchers and professionals for peer-reviewed research.
Revises the national childhood cancer registry grant program to require the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to award grants to state cancer registries to enhance and expand infrastructure to track the epidemiology of cancer in children, adolescents, and young adults.
Requires a Comptroller General (GAO) report regarding the barriers to conducting pediatric studies of oncologic therapies in applications for new drugs or biological products under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, including recommendations to improve development and access to new therapies as well as assessments of: (1) the feasibility of requiring studies for a pediatric oncologic indication if the therapeutic target of a drug or biologic product for an adult oncologic indication is highly relevant to any pediatric cancer to which it could apply, and (2) the impact of altering the current exemption for orphan drug designations relating to rare diseases or conditions.
People & committees
Rep. Van Hollen, Chris [D-MD-8] · D–MD
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.2607 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.2607 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.2607 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.2607 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.