corner
Healthy Skepticism
Join us to help reduce harm from misleading health information.
Increase font size   Decrease font size   Print-friendly view   Print
Register Log in

Healthy Skepticism Library item: 16609

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

 

Publication type: news

Morrison T
Are You Sure You Want Off-Label Drug Promotion Protected Under Freedom of Speech?
BNet 2009 Oct 7
http://industry.bnet.com/pharma/10004679/are-you-sure-you-want-off-label-drug-promotion-protected-under-freedom-of-speech/


Full text:

On what planet is Allergan’s lawsuit, which claims the FDA’s off-label drug promotion ban violates the First Amendment right to free speech, a good idea?

Allergan asserts it is stuck between a rock and a hard place.

The FDA is requiring the company to distribute medication guides and other materials to doctors warning of the risks associated with off-label use of anti-wrinkle drug Botox (botulinum toxin type A). According to Bloomberg:

The company said it should also be allowed to proactively provide information on benefits, dosing, patient selection and other information that can help doctors make appropriate treatment decisions.

But providing that information could trigger an off-label marketing lawsuit by the Department of Justice, Allergan whines.

Really? The FDA allows companies to give doctors copies of peer-reviewed journal articles concerning the off-label use of drugs. Allergan can hand out research – vetted by unbiased experts – on the patient populations, dosing and outcomes of Botox studies in unapproved indications. What else exactly does the company feel the need to distribute?

If it’s information genuinely necessary to ensure patient safety, it’s hard to imagine Allergan couldn’t work with the FDA and DOJ to find a solution. The fact that the company is taking the lawsuit route seems to indicate it’s looking for carte blanche to promote unapproved Botox uses (and if everybody could do that, there wouldn’t be much incentive to conduct the pricey trials to get those uses approved).

The DOJ already subpoenaed Allergan about potential off-label Botox promotion for headaches, and the company spent $7.4 million responding to the subpoena. As my colleague Jim Edwards noted, the FDA lawsuit follows conveniently on the heels of that little tussle.

A lot of drug companies will probably come up with reasons to rally behind Allergan’s cause, but would allowing off-label promotion really serve the public good? After all, pharma has not proven particularly ethical or good about policing themselves in the sales and marketing department.

And beyond that, do drug companies really want to open themselves up to the liability that could accompany being able to promote their products off-label? Because the DOJ’s $2.3 billion settlement with Pfizer over off-label Bextra promotion pales in comparison to the $4.85 billion Merck had to pay to settle its Vioxx civil litigation.

 

  Healthy Skepticism on RSS   Healthy Skepticism on Facebook   Healthy Skepticism on Twitter

Please
Click to Register

(read more)

then
Click to Log in
for free access to more features of this website.

Forgot your username or password?

You are invited to
apply for membership
of Healthy Skepticism,
if you support our aims.

Pay a subscription

Support our work with a donation

Buy Healthy Skepticism T Shirts


If there is something you don't like, please tell us. If you like our work, please tell others.

Email a Friend








Far too large a section of the treatment of disease is to-day controlled by the big manufacturing pharmacists, who have enslaved us in a plausible pseudo-science...
The blind faith which some men have in medicines illustrates too often the greatest of all human capacities - the capacity for self deception...
Some one will say, Is this all your science has to tell us? Is this the outcome of decades of good clinical work, of patient study of the disease, of anxious trial in such good faith of so many drugs? Give us back the childlike trust of the fathers in antimony and in the lancet rather than this cold nihilism. Not at all! Let us accept the truth, however unpleasant it may be, and with the death rate staring us in the face, let us not be deceived with vain fancies...
we need a stern, iconoclastic spirit which leads, not to nihilism, but to an active skepticism - not the passive skepticism, born of despair, but the active skepticism born of a knowledge that recognizes its limitations and knows full well that only in this attitude of mind can true progress be made.
- William Osler 1909