{
  "id": "RL33925",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "RL33925",
  "active": false,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 348658,
      "date": "2007-03-13",
      "retrieved": "2016-04-07T18:17:38.050029",
      "title": "Drug Safety: A Side-by-Side Comparison of Bills in the 110th Congress",
      "summary": "Members of Congress and the public are increasingly concerned about the ability of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to ensure that the drugs sold in the United States are safe and effective. In November 2004, FDA asked the Institute of Medicine (IOM) to assess the current system for evaluating and ensuring drug safety and to make recommendations to improve risk assessment, surveillance, and the safe use of drugs. IOM released The Future of Drug Safety: Promoting and Protecting the Health of the Public in September 2006, and FDA issued its response in January 2007. The following drug safety bills have been introduced in the 110th Congress: S. 468 / H.R. 788, S. 484, and H.R. 1165.\nAlthough the legislation and the IOM report address many of the same drug safety issues, the bills differ in their treatment of FDA authority to require action and to enforce compliance, comparative effectiveness studies, and how to fund any additional agency activities. For example, S. 468 / H.R. 788 would strengthen FDA\u2019s post-approval drug safety activities by creating a new Center for Postmarket Evaluation and Research for Drugs and Biologics. The other bills would leave these activities where they currently reside in the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. All the bills would allow the FDA to penalize (through civil fines, injunctions, or withdrawal of marketing approval or licensure) drug manufacturers who did not conduct required postmarket studies or who failed to report study results.\nThe IOM committee recommended that Congress provide substantially increased resources to FDA to bolster its drug safety activities. S. 468 / H.R. 788 would authorize appropriations to carry out the bill\u2019s provisions, S. 484 would rely on user fees, expanding FDA\u2019s existing authority to use such fees, and H.R. 1165 does not address funding.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "encoding": "utf-8",
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/RL33925",
          "sha1": "1604379a374827e813073b7ebb3e0ff8f270d20f",
          "filename": "files/20070313_RL33925_1604379a374827e813073b7ebb3e0ff8f270d20f.html",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/RL33925",
          "sha1": "1e8243ef459ae00ee312dea7d8a6e2bc56974a84",
          "filename": "files/20070313_RL33925_1e8243ef459ae00ee312dea7d8a6e2bc56974a84.pdf",
          "images": null
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    }
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Appropriations",
    "Health Policy"
  ]
}