PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 24, 2003
Pediatric Research Equity Act of 2003 - Amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to require license applications for new drugs and biological products to assess such drug's or product's safety and effectiveness for relevant pediatric subpopulations, including dosage.
Permits deferral of such assessments under specified circumstances. Permits full waiver of such assessments under certain conditions, including if: (1) studies are highly impractical or impossible; or (2) there is no meaningful therapeutic advantage or benefit in the pediatric population and the drug or biological product is not likely to be used in a substantial number of pediatric patients. Permits partial waivers at the request of an applicant for a specific pediatric subpopulation if any of the full waiver grounds apply to that subpopulation or reasonable attempts for a pediatric formulation for that subpopulation have failed.Requires labels to provide indication in cases in which a waiver has been granted due to evidence a product would be unsafe or ineffective in pediatric populations.Authorizes the Secretary of Health and Human Services to specify a date for submission of pediatric assessments if: (1) the drug or biological product would represent a meaningful therapeutic benefit for pediatric patients for one or more claimed indications and the absence of adequate labeling could pose significant risks to pediatric patients; or (2) it is used for a number of pediatric patients for the labeled indications and the absence of adequate labeling could pose significant risks to pediatric patients. Sets forth criteria for full waiver and partial waivers of such requirement. Requires labels to provide indication in cases in which a waiver has been granted due to evidence a product would be unsafe or ineffective in pediatric populations.Requires the Secretary to issue a written request for related pediatric studies under the Public Health Service Act or under this Act before requiring an assessment for a drug. Directs the Secretary, after determining that there is no agreement to such a written request, to certify whether the Secretary has sufficient funds to conduct the study under the Public Health Service Act, taking into account prioritization of drugs for which pediatric studies are needed. States that if a person fails to submit an assessment under this Act, or a request for approval of a pediatric formulation, the relevant drug or biological product may be considered misbranded solely because of that failure and subject to enforcement action.
People & committees
Rep. Greenwood, James C. [R-PA-8] · R–PA
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: Aug 18, 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.2857 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.2857 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.2857 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.2857 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.