CME

News Week in Review, January 26, 2015

NXLevel Compliance Team , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Senator Warren looks to use pharmaceutical company penalties to support research at the FDA and NIH, a new report reveals that a significant amount of businesses in China pay bribes, a physician lobbies for a Sunshine Act in Scotland, and a bill is introduced in the House to exclude CME and medical texts from Sunshine reporting.

Comedy, drama and just a dash of controversy thrown in for good measure. No, we’re not referring to this year’s Oscar nominations – although one does have to wonder how The Lego Movie was snubbed for Best Animated Picture – we’re talking about the NFL’s annual supreme slugfest, the Super Bowl. This Sunday, millions will park themselves in front of their television sets to see the Patriots and Seahawks fight it out for the Lombardi Trophy (and of course, the cursory trip to Walt Disney World). If you’re ready for a brief respite from the politics of “Deflate-gate,” we offer all the compliance news fit to blog, with this week’s News in Review.

Starting on offense in our first story is Senator Elizabeth Warren. During a conference hosted by a health advocacy group, the Senator said she intends to introduce legislation that will create a fund to support research at the FDA and NIH. The fund, which Warren referred to as a “swear jar” for the industry, would be financed through fines imposed on large pharmaceutical companies that break the law. Fines will only be imposed on companies with at least one blockbuster drug, and would equal 1% of a company’s total profits for each blockbuster drug it sells.

PhRMA quickly lined up on the other side of the ball to oppose the issue. The organization pointed out that the industry spends billions of dollars on research each year and is responsible for 20% of all funding of domestic research. The statement went on to say the work of the NIH is important, but to “siphon funding from the groundbreaking medical research happening in the biopharmaceutical industry will have devastating consequences for patients and society.” Those consequences would ultimately include fewer medicines and loss of jobs.

If you think Deflate-gate is controversial, it doesn’t compare to a recent report that found 35% of businesses in China pay bribes in order to do business in the country. One CEO participating in the research called bribery the “unspoken rule.” The problem is more common in foreign companies than those based on the mainland, and the real estate and construction sectors have the highest instances of bribery. The vast majority of research participants describe bribery in China as a “plague,” and just over 60% of the participants would like to see action taken to stave off the problem. Unfortunately, a third of participants are not optimistic about that happening.

It’s third down and goal for a transparency initiative in Scotland. A physician will have his petition for a Sunshine Act in Scotland heard by the Scottish Parliament for the third time. The physician is petitioning the government to create a law that establishes a searchable database of payments from pharmaceutical companies to National Health Service healthcare workers.

We’re back in the transparency replay booth here in the U.S. as well. A bipartisan bill was introduced in the House of Representatives to exclude the value of CME and medical texts from reporting, under the Sunshine Act. This is the second go around for the bill in the House.

Well, that’s it for this Super edition of the Compliance News in Review. Whether you’re rooting for the Seahawks or Patriots, or just a great halftime show by Katy Perry, enjoy the game and we’ll see you right back here next week. Have a great week everyone!

Week in Review, December 16, 2014

NXLevel Compliance Team , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Otismed pleads guilty to selling knee replacement cutting guides that had been rejected by the FDA, Senators Hatch and Bennett introduce bill to exempt low risk software from the definition of a medical device, and the oversight group for the APBI Code of Conduct chastises Galderma over the requirements for attending a presentation.

They litter the landscape of the Christmas season, and have become so iconic that an entire day is dedicated to celebrating the infamous ugly Christmas sweater. It’s as much a fixture of the season as Santa hats and reindeer antler headbands. In fact, a number of on-line retail outlets have jumped on the bandwagon for this haute mess couture. Before we get dive into a debate over the categorization of light-up sweaters as “ugly” or just a “whole separate item,” we’ll dive into something a little less controversial, this week’s Compliance News in Review.

This isn’t a warm and cozy situation for Otismed and its former CEO. The company pleaded guilty to criminal and civil charges that it sold knee replacement surgery cutting guides despite it being rejected by the FDA. According to prosecutors, the former executive directed that over 200 of units be shipped despite the product not receiving FDA clearance and the company’s board voting to cease shipments of the product. Otismed was purchased by Stryker, which was unaware of the incident at the time of purchase. The company will pay $80 million to resolve the charges and the former CEO will be sentenced in March of 2015.

There are no ugly feelings from med tech innovators about a bill recently introduced in the U.S. Senate. Senators Orin Hatch and Michael Bennett have introduced a bill that will exempt low-risk medical software and apps from the definition of a medical device under the FDCA. The senators say the bill will provide clarity over which devices should be regulated. The bill, called the MEDTECH Act, removes five categories of innovation from the definition of a covered device.

Could the Prescriptions Medicines Code of Practice Authority (PMCPA) be unraveling its ties with Galderma? PMCPA, the oversight group for the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry’s Code of Practice, and Galderma are at an impasse over a public reprimand issued against the company by the organization. The reprimand stems from a complaint lodged by a nurse attending an educational meeting sponsored by Galderma. The complaint alleges that attendees had to prove they had purchased the company’s filler in order to attend the presentation. In addition, the PMCPA says attendees received financial incentive to attend in the form of free product. Galderma says it was not uncommon to require attendees to purchase product in order to attend, and the filler is a medical devices so any related activities do not fall under the Code. Galderma appealed the decision, and the PMCPA has removed the company from its list of companies agreeing to abide by the Code.

With that, we put a wrap on this week’s edition of the News in Review. Good luck with those ugly sweater contests this weekend everyone, and remember, light-up reindeer noses always seem to catch the judge’s eyes.

Have a great week!

Week in Review, September 10, 2014

NXLevel Compliance Team , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

PhRMA pushes for dismissal of Integrilin off-label case, a recent FCPA settlement reveals a shift in DOJ thinking, European companies are not sure how to handle informed consent with EFPIA, and another organization wants CMS to keep the CME exemption in the Sunshine Act Final Rule.

Cue the heavenly choir; all is right with the world once again. Football season is here! The college season kicked off with some unexpected upsets, unexpected blowouts (Johnny Who? Texas A&M is here to play, y’all!), and even disruptions due to weather. The pros started the season with a kick this past weekend. The next several months are sure to be full of excitement as we get our gridiron on. For now, it’s back to the real world, as we take a look at the latest in compliance-related news with this week’s compliance News in Review.

Kicking off this week edition is PhRMA and its request to a California federal court to dismiss an off-label case on First Amendment grounds. The suit was filed by a whistleblower who alleges the three companies violated the FDCA by using truthful, off-label statements to promote a drug. PhRMA says the claim was nullified through the Supreme Court decisions in Sorrell v. IMS and the U.S. v. Caronia. According to the organization, healthcare professionals need accurate, up-to-date information about uses of medication, and neither the government nor the whistleblower alleged that the information provided about the drug was inaccurate.

The recent Smith and Wesson FCPA settlement reveals a couple of new additions to the government’s playbook, which businesses might want to note. First, the case appears to be signaling a shift in the DOJ and SEC’s focus on “high value targets” to those involving small and mid-size companies. Next, in the charges against Smith and Wesson, the internal controls violations centered on the company’s lack of an adequate compliance program, rather than financial documentation. The government noted that there was a policy prohibiting bribery in place, but the company had no process for ensuring the policy was followed.

A recent article from FCPA Professor lists four attributes of a strong compliance program that can be gleaned from a successful football program. First, understand the playbook. Effectively communicating the playbook is the first step toward becoming a successful team. Likewise, FCPA training should be executable by all employees. He suggests companies don’t need to train employees to be FCPA experts, but rather, provide them with “FCPA goggles” by which they can discern if actions are potentially problematic. Second, execution by all team members is key. More FCPA violations occur from the actions of employees doing the day-to-day work, rather than those in the C-suite or Board. Third is having a flexible playbook. A company needs to take a look at its compliance risks, and manage its own risks, not those of another company. Last but not least, play hard, but not too hard. A business can run into issues (penalties) when it competes too aggressively.

Tackling informed consent in regards to the EFPIA Disclosure Code is proving to be challenging for many companies. Data privacy laws in European countries require that companies obtain consent from healthcare professionals (HCPs) and healthcare organizations (HCOs) prior to publishing any data about transfers of value between the company and HCPs or HCOs. To complicate matters, companies also need to manage consent for direct and indirect payments. At a recent aggregate spend conference, audience members were polled as to how their company planned to handle managing consent. Most of the audience was still unsure of how it would be handled and nearly 20% said their company planned to manage consent directly, as opposed to turning it over to a third party.

The CME Coalition is jumping on the pile with comments regarding CMS’ proposal to eliminate the CME exemption from Sunshine’s Final Rule. The Coalition says the idea of eliminating the exemption is problematic because it requires manufacturers to report payments if they become aware of the identity of the payment recipient(s) within 18 months of the grant. In its comments, the organization suggested that CMS keep an explicit definition as to what constitutes accredited and certified CME, and revise the language in the CMS exclusion to be more specific.

The clock is ticking down on this edition of the Week in Review. We close with the suggestion that if your 2015 compliance training playbook needs refreshing, the PharmaCeritfy™ suite of compliance training solutions offers the eLearning modules and mobile apps you need to prepare your team to compete in today’s regulatory environment.

Have a great week everyone!

Week in Review, August 27, 2014

NXLevel Compliance Team , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Another industry organization calls for a change to the Sunshine Act, manufacturers claim data entered into Open Payments is now lost, the Supreme Court is petitioned to review the definition of instrumentality as it pertains to the FCPA, and questions are raised about potential reporting loopholes in the Medicine’s Australia Code of Conduct.

Bananas, fish fingers and custard for all! Doctor Who, season eight, is here! Finally, 12 makes his debut, and we can only hope that he still thinks bow ties and fezzes are cool. And can we just take a moment to thank BBC America for scheduling Doctor Who to run here in the U.S. when it runs on BBC 1? Now we don’t have to spend months trying to avoid news about the show, like we do for Downton Abbey. So let’s jump in the TARDIS and take a journey back in time with this week’s News in Review.

Exterminate! Exterminate! That’s the sentiment of the Council of Medical Specialty Societies (CMSS) regarding CMS’ proposed change to the rule in the Sunshine Act about payments for CME. The Council said the current exemption for payments associated with accredited CME needs to remain in place for several reasons. First, a distinction should be maintained between accredited and certified CME and other educational programs in order to preserve the independence of CME programs. Second, faculty payments should not be subject to reporting because the faculty member’s relationship is with the CME provider, not the manufacturer. Finally, attendees of accredited CME should not be subject to the reporting of payments, because like faculty, attendees have no relationship with the manufacturers providing grants for a program.

Speaking of Sunshine, after Open Payments came back online, drug and device manufacturers reported that payment data once in the system is now gone. CMS says the missing data is due to matching issues. Some of the issues are the result of a data marrying problem that took the system down recently. In other cases, information such as license numbers and names do not exactly match the information in CMS’s database. Policy and Medicine was informed by manufacturers and physicians alike that information that was accurate in Open Payments is now missing. One manufacturer claims all of its clinical research data is now gone. According to the article, the problem could be with the NPPES (National Plan and Provider Enumeration System) database. Portions of New Jersey doctors’ state license numbers were cut off in the database. Also, an analysis last year by the OIG found that almost half of the NPPES records that were inspected contained at least one inaccurate piece of information.

What is instrumentality under the FCPA? We could ask the Inner Council on Gallifrey, but since that is fictional (what!?), the U.S. Supreme Court will have to do. The high court has been petitioned by two individuals convicted of bribery under the FCPA to review a federal appeals court’s definition of an “instrumentality.” The two were convicted of paying kickbacks to employees of a government-owned telecommunications company. The government argued the telecom company was an instrumentality of the government, and the appeals court agreed.

 

Some advocacy groups are already looking for a regeneration of Medicines Australia’s transparency requirements in the latest edition of that group’s Code of Conduct. The Code is pending authorization by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC). The organizations have petitioned the ACCC to not authorize Medicines Australia’s Code of Conduct based on potential loopholes that will allow physicians to opt out of having their payment information publicly disclosed.

 

Well, that bring us to the end of this week’s episode. Based on the plethora of recent news stories related to Open Payments, the demand for transparency when dealing with HCPs isn’t going away anytime soon. The Sunshine Act: The Federal Physician Spend Disclosure Law, from our PharmaCertify™ suite of customizable online compliance modules, offers the content your team needs to stay abreast of the ramifications and reporting requirements of the law. We even offer a complementary Sunshine Act mobile app to help ensure your reps have the information where they need it most – in the field and at their fingertips.

 

Have a great week everyone!

 

Have a great week everyone!

 

Week in Review, August 5, 2014

NXLevel Compliance Team , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Industry groups ask CMS to help clarify context of physician payment data, a study finds most physicians have yet to visit the Open Payments website, another medical device company settles a False Claims case and Senator Grassley weighs in on the concept of a gold standard certification for compliance programs.

The calendar tells us the dog days of summer are upon us. Luckily, some of us have had a bit of a “cold spell” recently, so those dog days haven’t had quite the bite they normally do. As you seek ways to deal with the combined heat of the sun and of the Dog Star (as ancient stargazers may have believed), we offer a cool refreshing break of a different sort, with this week’s Compliance News in Review.

Industry and medical groups are putting the heat on CMS. Over 20 medical associations, PhRMA, and BIO sent a letter to CMS asking how the agency plans to help the public understand the nature and purpose of the physician data that will soon be available through Open Payments. The groups cited the recent release of Medicare Part B payments as an example of why they are concerned about proper context. They claim that context was missing when CMS released the Part B data, causing confusion as to which doctors were abusing the system and which were receiving large payments for legitimate reasons. The letter also asked CMS to reach out to the physicians and make them aware that the data will be published soon. Responding to inquiries from the Wall Street Journal, a CMS spokesperson said the agency plans to publish that nature of payments to physicians and teaching hospitals and provide context for the public.

A majority of physicians are slow to step into the Sunshine according to a new survey. The study found only 7% of physicians have visited the Open Payments website and 85% want to review payment data before it is sent to CMS. 80% want to be informed of the value of items before they accept them. The survey also indicates the majority of physicians are concerned with public perception once the data is published. Physicians seem to be more willing to accept certain payments over others. For example, only 16% of physicians said they would no longer accept meals but, 40% say they will no longer accept gifts. The study also addressed companies’ best practices in aggregate spend systems and global transparency.

On the settlement front, medical device company, Vascular Solutions, agreed to pay $520,000 to settle allegations it violated the False Claims Act by promoting its product for an unapproved use. The suit was brought by a former sales rep, and alleged the company promoted a kit for the treatment of veins deep in the leg, rather than varicose veins near the surface of the skin, the use for which it has been approved.

No gold stars for compliance programs says Senator Chuck Grassley. At a House subcommittee meeting on the False Claims Act (FCA), several witnesses referenced a Chamber of Commerce report that proposed a program through which companies could be certified as having a “gold standard” compliance program. Companies achieving the certification would be treated differently under the FCA and requirements for whistleblowers would change. In comments following the meeting, Senator Grassley said he was not in favor of a program that provided such a “get out of jail free card.” Grassley is skeptical about companies self-reporting and he claims having a certified compliance program will not change whether they do or do not self-report.

With that, we close our dog days of summer issue of the Week in Review. Have a great week everyone and we’ll see you by the pool!

Week in Review, July 22, 2014

NXLevel Compliance Team , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Minnesota Board of Pharmacy confirms that payments to nurse practitioners and PAs must be reported, the FDA issues more Warning Letters, a grand jury indicts FedEx for shipping drugs for illegal pharmacies, and industry funding for CME continues to decline.

With summer in full swing, Major League Baseball took a break from the pennant races for its annual showcase of the best and brightest stars from both leagues…and the ratings were up. In what seems to be the trend lately, the American League came out on top and National League fans were left lamenting the fact that should their team make it to their World Series, they will once again be denied the coveted home field advantage (strange rule indeed). Now, as trade talks heat up and races tighten, we step up to the plate with this week’s News in Review.

First up, we have news from the state that hosted the All Star Game, Minnesota. The Minnesota Board of Pharmacy released a memo confirming that 2014 payments to nurse practitioners, physician assistants, veterinarians and dental technicians must be reported in May 2015. The Board advised manufacturers to begin tracking data for these professionals since it expected the legislature to require companies to report those payments.

Batting second this week is the always confusing topic of social media. The FDA recently issued an Untitled Letter to Gilead and a Warning Letter to Zarbee’s Naturals regarding the company’s use of social media for product promotion. In its letter to the company, the FDA cited an ad that used Google’s AdWords. The ad neglected to provide risk information, and the drug was misbranded. The ad also did not include the generic name of the product and only featured the brand name in a couple of URLs listed in the ad. Zarbee’s Warning Letter focused on the use of Facebook “likes.” The FDA equates “likes” top promotions and the company “liked” several customer testimonials on its page.

Companies that manufacture products for human use aren’t the only ones running afoul of the FDA’s promotion regulations. A Warning Letter was issued recently to the French pharmaceutical facturer, AB Science, for the off-label marketing of a veterinary drug. The letter cited several off-label statements on a product website. The FDA also noted that the company neglected to list important safety information on the product website and other promotional material.

The federal government took a swing at FedEx recently when a federal grand jury indicted FedEx for shipping drugs for illegal pharmacies. According to prosecutors, the company was warned for over a decade that they were shipping drugs for illegal pharmacies, but that those warnings went unheeded. Rather, the company “departed from its usual business practices” to continue shipping the drugs. According to prosecutors top managers at FedEx approved the continued shipping to known illegal pharmacies. A senior vice president for FedEx said the company was innocent of the charges levied against it, and would plead not guilty.

It’s a single for industry support of CME…a single digit decline in funding that is. According to the ACCME’s Annual Report, industry funding of accredited CME dropped by 1.9% in 2013. Support from industry represents 27% of all CME income. This is a far cry from 2008, when industry funding represented almost half of CME funding. Physician attendance at CME events was down in 2013 by just over 4%, but attendance by non-physicians was up by 5%.

As we wind down this week’s version of the Week in Review, we offer one last pitch about the importance of reviewing your Sunshine Act training needs – particularly in light of the ongoing activities around Open Payments registration and data review. The PharmaCertify™ eLearning module, The Sunshine Act: The Federal Physician Spend Disclosure Law, is designed to bring your team up to speed on reportable and excluded expenditures, and the information required for submission to CMS.

Have a great week everyone!

Week in Review, July 9, 2014

NXLevel Compliance Team , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

CMS makes changes to reporting deadlines and requirements, Canada continues to collect date about the effects of off-label use of drugs, and Medicines Australia updates its Code of Conduct.

You scream, I scream, we all scream for ice cream! And we’ll be doing a lot of screaming because July is National Ice Cream Month. (July – 31 days. Baskin-Robbins – 31 flavors. Coincidence?) Whether on a cone, in a cup or topped with sauces, fruit or confections, July is a great month to enjoy this cold treat. And gone are the days when Tutti Frutti was the outrageous flavor. Now, along with the likes of Cookies & Cream and Rum Raisin, you can have your pick of Chocolate-Chili, Roasted Garlic, or Mushy Green Peas. As you ponder your favorite flavor (bizarre or otherwise) for beating the July heat, we offer our own scoop with this week’s News in Review.

The deadline for submitting Phase 2 data melted away, sort of, last week. CMS sent out an email essentially extending the deadline for submitting Open Payments Phase 2 documents to July 7. In the e-mail, CMS said it wanted to assure accuracy and completeness of the reports and attestations and that penalties would not be enforced for non-compliance until after July 7.

Also melting away could be the CME exclusion in final rule for the Sunshine Act. CMS is planning to propose a change to the exemption for reporting CME payments. The current rule allows an exemption for three reasons: the program is accredited by certain organizations, the physician isn’t paid directly by the manufacturer, or the manufacturer doesn’t influence the selection of speakers. CMS ultimately decided to remove the exclusion due to the redundancies involving indirect payments that occur when the manufacturer is unaware of the recipient. The agency also does not want to appear that it is indicating support of certain accrediting bodies by continuing to specifically name them in the exemption. The proposed changes will appear in the July 11 Federal Register.

And if the CME change isn’t enough, CMS has a few other toppings to add to the final rule sundae. The agency is also proposing that “stock, stock options, and other ownership interests” not be one category, but three. Other changes include the requirement that all manufacturers, including device manufacturers, use the product’s marketed name on reports and the removal of the “definition of a covered device” from the rule.

Canada’s Health Minister, Rona Ambrose, is serving up a scoop or two of new information about serious side effects resulting from off-label drug use. Health Canada has been collecting the information for several years, but technical issues prevented it from making the database of information publicly available. The group is planning a systems upgrade that will allow the regulator to share the database. No timeline for when the public can expect to access the information has been released.

Medicines Australia is looking for approval of its latest flavor. The organization has submitted the 18th edition of its Code of Conduct to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission for authorization. The new Code includes requirements for the reporting of transfers of value from industry to healthcare professionals. If authorized, the Code will become effective January 2015, with the new transparency requirements going into effect October of 2015. However, not everyone is happy with the result. A provision requiring manufacturers to obtain permission from physicians to allow their name to be published with the payment data, has members of the Greens political party very concerned. A spokesman said the party was considering reintroducing legislation to make the reporting of transfers of value to physicians a legal requirement.

Sunshine and transparency will no doubt continue to be a popular flavor, both here and abroad, for the distant future. That’s why we are adding a global transparency focused module to our growing list of PharmaCertify™ off-the-shelf learning solutions. To learn more about the module or see a content outline, contact Sean Murphy at smurphy@nxlevelsolutions.com.

Have a great rest of the week!

Week in Review, June 09, 2014

NXLevel Compliance Team , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

France publishes its first public reports related to physician payments, several companies pay out millions in settlement fines,  medical affairs professionals discuss their changing role in compliance, and Massachusetts releases a notice regarding the reporting of the same spend information required under the Sunshine Act.

Break out the mortarboard and fire up Pomp and Circumstance, it’s that time of year again. has arrived. There’s nothing quite like watching the graduates cross that stage, receive their diploma and bask in the achievement. Here’s hoping they enjoy the moment before they have to face the harsh realities of the next phase of life. (Remember that moment when we realized that “nap time” in first grade did not include a mat? Welcome to the real world!) With that in mind, we proudly present this week’s graduating class…and this week’s compliance News in Review.

A transfer story from France leads our parade of worthy stories. France has published the first public reports of industry transfers of value (TOVs) to healthcare professionals, as required by the French Sunshine Act. To manipulate this database you’ll need to dust off your old French text book, or quickly invest in a Rosetta Stone course, because there is no option to switch to an English (or any other language for that matter) translation. The company information is all .txt files that are practically impossible to read, but if you know some HCPs in France you’d like to search for, that information is slightly more reader friendly…except for the whole being in French thing. Oh well, the information is there for the linguistic and inquisitive among us. According to the folks at Policy and Medicine, there has been little press coverage of the release of the data.

Don’t get to comfortable with the French Sunshine Act though, it appears there may be a major change coming soon. Recently, the Ministry of Social Affairs of Healthcare issued a draft order that would modify some of the regulations. One modification will simplify the details reported about HCP arrangements. Another will lessen the level to which companies need to protect HCP information. Finally, a change to the schedule initially set up to declare the benefits and the conventions has been proposed.

Several industry companies are facing unexpected fees and fines. Medtronic will pay $9.9 million to settle allegations under the False Claims Act. According to the government, the company used a variety of payment schemes to induce physicians to use its pacemakers and defibrillators. The company is alleged to have paid physicians to speak at events to increase referral business, created marketing/business development plans for physicians at no cost, and provided sporting event tickets to physicians.

Boehringer Ingleheim has agreed to pay $650 million to settle 4,000 lawsuits involving the drug, Pradaxa. According to a BI spokesperson, the average payout per settlement will be $162,500. Plaintiffs claim the company didn’t adequately warn patients of the risks associated with use of the blood thinner. The company says the drug’s safety has been repeatedly demonstrated, and the settlement does not change the drug plays in patients’ lives.

GSK has agreed to pay $105 million to 44 states and the District of Columbia to settle claims they illegally promoted two antidepressants and an asthma drug. In the agreement with the states, the company agreed to changes in its incentives to sales people, not use paid physicians to promote products, and to refrain from making deceptive or misleading statements in its advertising.

Chicago is throwing its cap in the ring and has filed suit against five manufacturers of highly addictive painkillers. In a suit similar to one filed by several California counties, Chicago is claiming the companies overstated the benefits and downplayed the risks associated with the use of the pain drugs. The suit says the companies violated laws related to consumer fraud, misleading advertising and false claims. In addition to the civil penalties and punitive damages, the city is seeking to reclaim profits associated with the illegal marketing activity.

As the regulatory landscape changes, medical affairs personnel are becoming more important in conversations with HCPs and more involved with health economic and outcomes research (HEOR). Within these two areas, concerns regarding off-label use of products are becoming a hot issue. Speakers at last week’s World Congress said their companies have evolved their policies on responding to unsolicited requests for off-label information. Compliance issues related to HEOR include the nature of the studies used and whether or not the company is providing payers with balanced information regarding the safety and efficacy of products.

Massachusetts has finally moved the tassel on some of its HCP spend reporting requirements. The state recently released a Notice of Federal Preemption, which stated that the Department of Public Health could not require pharmaceutical and med device companies to report the same spend information that is required by the Sunshine Act.

And with that, we bring this week’s ceremony to a resounding close. We wish all of the graduates out there good luck with whatever life holds for them next. Toss those caps in the air everyone and have a great week! We’ll see you right back here next week.

Week in Review, May 20, 2014

NXLevel Compliance Team , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

A new survey shows that calls to company hotlines are on the rise and a U.S. Appellate Court looks to clarify the meaning of a key term in FCPA cases.

It’s time to dust off that picnic blanket and dig the stadium chair out of the back of the closet…summer concert season is about to kick off. From county festivals to stadium shows, acts ranging from big bands to Buffet will soon be filling the warm air with the sounds of summer. Whether your tastes tend toward rock or Rachmaninoff, you’re bound to find a sound that soothes your soul again this year. While you ponder your live summer playlist, we’ll strike up the band with the compliance news you need to know for this week, with the Week in Review.

Are whistleblowers turning it up to eleven? A recent survey conducted by the Society of Corporate Compliance and Ethics (SCCE) and the Heath Care Compliance Association (HCCA) found that reports to company hotlines are on the rise. According to the survey, 37% of compliance officers say they have seen a rise in reports to hotlines and another 51% say the rate of reports remains steady. In publicly traded companies, the rise is more pronounced, with 56% of compliance officers reporting an increase in hotline calls. The CEO of SCCE and HCCA says the rise is good news, and points to employees’ willingness to come forward as evidence that their concerns will be heard objectively.

GSK, the first industry company called out in last summer’s bribery accusation parade, faced the music during a press conference this past week. The Chinese police accused the former head of GSK’s operations in China, Mark Reilly, of telling employees to pay bribes to doctors and hospitals in order increase sales. According to the police, the bribery led to higher drug prices and illegal revenue in excess of $150 million. Two other GSK executives were also accused of being involved in orchestrating the bribery scheme. The company said it was continuing to cooperate with the investigation and legal experts say the accusations against Mr. Reilly may cause some companies to rethink their investment in China.

And just when GSK thought the news in China couldn’t get worse, here comes an encore. The company is now accused of tax evasion in a Chinese legal newspaper. According to the publication, which is run by the government, the company failed to pay import duties and taxes for an HIV product between 2005 and 2008. GSK has not issued a comment.

Could an Appellate Court’s decision in an FCPA case be music to the ears of prosecutors, defense teams and companies alike? In a closely followed case, the court provided a definition of the word “instrumentality” as it pertains to who qualifies as a foreign official under the FCPA. The case hinged on that definition. The court wrote that an instrumentality is, “an entity controlled by the government of a foreign country that performs a function the controlling government treats as its own.” The court went on to say that the facts of a case will determine what constitutes “control” and a “function the government treats as its own,” but did suggest there are certain factors for judges and juries to consider, such as whether the government has a controlling interest in the entity, or the ability to hire and fire the principals.

Well, that just about brings us to the end of this week’s performance. Obviously, the sound of settlements and investigations continues to fill the airwaves. Now, more than ever, the PharmaCertify™ eLearning modules, Commercial Compliance Overview and Good Promotional Practices offer a perfectly harmonized solution to compliance training challenges. Compliance Overview presents a comprehensive introduction to the critical commercial topics all employees need to understand, while Good Promotional Practices targets those in the field, highlighting the policies and best practices related to product promotion and HCP interactions.

Have a great week everyone and rock on!

News Week in Review, March 10, 2014

NXLevel Compliance Team , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Pharmaceutical companies cut spending on physician speakers,  the DOJ turns up the HEAT, China ups the stakes on the bribery front, and the value of a reprint under Sunshine is still unclear.

Hey, wake up! The transition to Daylight Saving Time is such a drag…on our energy that is. Soon enough, we’ll all be excited about the extra daylight hours, but right now, we’d settle for some extra caffeine. To help you find your set point and adjust your internal clock, we offer our regularly scheduled overview of all things compliance…with this week’s News in Review.

The amount pharmaceutical companies spend on physician speakers is not exactly spring forward, according to an analysis of Pro Publica data. In fact, several large companies have dramatically cut spending on physician speakers, which some attribute to the transparency requirements of Sunshine. The companies offer a different rationale though. A spokesperson for Lilly says educational programs are of most value when a product is launched, or new clinical data is released. Additionally, as web conferencing increases, the need for speakers declines. A spokesperson for Pfizer points out that as blockbuster drugs go off patent and face generic competition, the need for educational programs and speakers for those drugs wanes.

Spending on drug marketing is on the rise in Washington D.C., according to a report by the George Washington University School of Public Health and Health Services. In 2012, companies spent $97.5 million on drug marketing, which represented the first year-on-year increase since 2007.

As spring draws near, and the temperatures rise, the DOJ continues to provide some HEAT of its own with the Health Care Fraud Prevention and Enforcement Action Team (HEAT) initiative. Using the False Claims Act as its primary tool, the agency has recovered $13.4 billion from individual providers, pharmaceutical companies, and medical device companies.

Takeda would like to turn back time after the company admitted using “inappropriate expressions” in an advertisement for its hypertension drug, Blopress, in Japan. A Japanese physician noticed that data presented in the advertisement was not consistent with the results of a head-to-head study with a competitor’s product. The company admitted that using a graph from a 2006 study in the advertisement could have caused confusion.

Speaking of losing sleep, life science executives may be lying in bed at night thinking about the increasing challenges of doing business in China. Officials in China announced that companies found to have committed bribery will be blacklisted and updated the country’s “Rules on the Establishment of Commercial Bribery Blacklists for Purchase and Distribution in the Health Care Industry.” Circular No. 50, which delineates the updates to the rules, states that a company may be blacklisted for several reasons, including minor instances of bribery that are not prosecuted by authorities. If blacklisted, hospitals and other facilities will be prohibited from purchasing goods in the province where the bribery occurred for two years. Companies blacklisted two or more times in five years will be prohibited from selling its products in the country all together.

A new study shows drug makers are not quite ready to crawl out from under the covers when it comes to using social media for clinical studies. The study conducted by the Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development (CSDD) found that companies using social media in the clinical research process are doing so in a “siloed and experimental fashion.”  Lack of guidance from the FDA and concerns about the impact of social media on study integrity are cited as factors slowing the adoption of social media for clinical trials.

What’s a Daylight Saving Time theme without at least one reference to Sunshine. With little in the way of guidance from CMS, companies are taking various approaches to determining the value of journal reprints under the Sunshine Act. Some companies follow what CMS has stated, and value a reprint at the cost the company paid to acquire it from a publisher. Other companies use a blended average model and some hire a third party to determine the value of their reprints. Complicating the matter further, doctors are starting to refuse reprints because they see them as taxable form of income.

As the sun sets much later in the day, and on this week’s News in Review, we close with a reminder that the PharmaCertify™ online learning module, The Sunshine Act: The Federal Physician Spend Disclosure Law, covers the topics your learners need to understand, like disclosure requirements and excluded payments, to stay abreast of this industry-changing legislation.

Have a bright and sunny week everyone!