PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 414.
Congressional Research Service
Version 01 · Reported to Senate with amendment(s) · Apr 5, 2016
Combination Product Regulatory Fairness Act of 2016
(Sec. 2) This bill amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to revise provisions regarding products that are a combination of a drug, medical device, or biological product.
The primary mode of action of a combination product must be the mode of action that makes the greatest contribution to the product's therapeutic effect. (Combination products are regulated based on their primary mode of action.) The FDA is prohibited from determining that a combination product is a drug or biological product solely because the product has a chemical action. If the sponsor of a combination product disagrees with the FDA's determination of the primary mode of action of the product, the FDA must provide the rationale for its determination and the sponsor and the FDA may agree to studies to inform a reevaluation of the product.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
After the primary mode of action of a product is determined, the sponsor and the FDA may agree to a combination product review plan that may address the standards and requirements applicable to the product's review, postmarket modification, or manufacturing. The plan must remain in effect unless the sponsor and the FDA agree otherwise or an issue essential to determining the safety or effectiveness of the product is identified.
The FDA may require the sponsor of a combination product that contains an approved constituent part to submit to the FDA only information that is necessary to assess the safety and effectiveness of the combination product, taking into account prior findings regarding the approved constituent part. If the approved constituent part is a drug, the application for the combination product must comply with specified requirements for drug applications.
The FDA Office of Combination Products must coordinate reviews of combination products and oversee feedback regarding such reviews. The office must review FDA agreements, guidance, and practices regarding combination products.
The FDA must: (1) issue guidance that describes the process and best practices for review of combination products, and (2) propose that certain types of combination products may adopt good manufacturing practices that vary from requirements in regulations.
People & committees
Sen. Isakson, Johnny [R-GA] · R–GA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 414.
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. Reported by Senator Alexander with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Without written report.
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. Reported by Senator Alexander with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Without written report.
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 21, 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 S.1767 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 S.1767 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 S.1767 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 S.1767 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.