Katherine A P Zagrodney1,2, Natasha Y Sheikhan2, Ashlyn Pinto3, Tania Sheikhan4, Theodore J Witek5,6. 1. Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation (IHPME), University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. 2. Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, 155 College Street, Toronto, ON, M5T 3M6, Canada. 3. Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4L8, Canada. 4. University College London, Gower Street, London, WCIE 6BT, UK. 5. Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation (IHPME), University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. ted.witek@utoronto.ca. 6. Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, 155 College Street, Toronto, ON, M5T 3M6, Canada. ted.witek@utoronto.ca.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In the United States, all pharmaceutical promotional activities must comply with regulatory standards set by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA); failure to comply may lead to receiving an FDA enforcement letter. Letters include details of the specific advertisement in violation, as well as the action that is required by the company to rectify the non-compliant promotion. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine trends in enforcement letters from the FDA to parties responsible for pharmaceutical promotion violations from 2005 to 2019. METHODS: A longitudinal trend analysis was conducted of FDA enforcement letters sent to pharmaceutical companies from 2005 to 2019 (n = 318). Publicly available enforcement letters released by the Office of Prescription Drug Promotion were accessed and analysed online through the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, a part of the FDA. Variables analysed included number of letters by year, violation categories, venues, intended audience, drug age and company revenues. Publicly available revenue was the major source for company revenue information. RESULTS: The total number of enforcement letters significantly decreased over time. Violations concerning risk information were significantly more prevalent than all other violation categories. Online promotional materials were most frequently cited. Proportionally, larger companies received the majority of letters in earlier years of observation, and smaller companies in later years (2013-2019). CONCLUSIONS: These trends are of value for industry and regulators alike in refining policy to ensure fair, balanced and meaningful information in pharmaceutical promotion. The frequency of violation letters has decreased in recent years; however, smaller companies have increasingly received the majority of letters. Small firms must increase their compliance around informing drug risk potential with balanced safety information across all promotional venues. Specifically, these findings are useful for pharmaceutical companies to direct educational efforts to promotional staff and their advertising agencies, especially regarding online advertising.
INTRODUCTION: In the United States, all pharmaceutical promotional activities must comply with regulatory standards set by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA); failure to comply may lead to receiving an FDA enforcement letter. Letters include details of the specific advertisement in violation, as well as the action that is required by the company to rectify the non-compliant promotion. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine trends in enforcement letters from the FDA to parties responsible for pharmaceutical promotion violations from 2005 to 2019. METHODS: A longitudinal trend analysis was conducted of FDA enforcement letters sent to pharmaceutical companies from 2005 to 2019 (n = 318). Publicly available enforcement letters released by the Office of Prescription Drug Promotion were accessed and analysed online through the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, a part of the FDA. Variables analysed included number of letters by year, violation categories, venues, intended audience, drug age and company revenues. Publicly available revenue was the major source for company revenue information. RESULTS: The total number of enforcement letters significantly decreased over time. Violations concerning risk information were significantly more prevalent than all other violation categories. Online promotional materials were most frequently cited. Proportionally, larger companies received the majority of letters in earlier years of observation, and smaller companies in later years (2013-2019). CONCLUSIONS: These trends are of value for industry and regulators alike in refining policy to ensure fair, balanced and meaningful information in pharmaceutical promotion. The frequency of violation letters has decreased in recent years; however, smaller companies have increasingly received the majority of letters. Small firms must increase their compliance around informing drug risk potential with balanced safety information across all promotional venues. Specifically, these findings are useful for pharmaceutical companies to direct educational efforts to promotional staff and their advertising agencies, especially regarding online advertising.
Authors: Natasha Y Sheikhan; Ashlyn M Pinto; Dominik A Nowak; Farbod Abolhassani; Patrick Lefebvre; Mei Sheng Duh; Theodore J Witek Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2021-07-01