Week in Review, August 27, 2014

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, May 13, 2014

CMS posts help for applicable manufacturers to prepare for Phase 2, Maine’s Pharmacy Board questions the validity of an Internet pharmacy, the OIG asks Boston Scientific about two of its products, and Brazil fines Eli Lilly for manufacturing violations.

We’re not sure how it happened, but somehow, nearly half the month of May has passed with us not realizing that this is Barbeque (or Barbecue if you prefer) Month. And if you thought (insert your favorite sports rivalry here) was a topic that could fire up a heated conversation, just mention proper barbecuing techniques. Pork versus beef, sauce versus no sauce (we won’t even open up the type of sauce can of worms), dry rub versus wet rub…it’s all a point of contention and fierce debate. So break out the brisket and make your plans to celebrate Barbecue/Barbeque Month while we fire up this week’s Compliance News in Review.

CMS is getting the coals all nice and hot for Phase 2 of the Open Payments data submission process. The agency announced that it will post a series of tutorials to help applicable manufacturers and GPOs prepare for Phase 2. The first of three tutorials is available now on the Open Payments website. CMS also announced that physicians and teaching hospitals will be able to register in CMS’ Enterprise Portal beginning June 1. Registration is not necessarily required for physicians or teaching hospitals, but it is needed if anyone from those institutions wants to see their Open Payments data.

The Maine Pharmacy Board is asking the Attorney General to apply some direct heat to an Internet pharmacy that has been advertising inexpensive drugs in the state. The president of Maine Pharmacy Association filed a complaint with the Board, saying the online drug seller wasn’t a licensed pharmacy. He says he ordered three medications from the company and all were made outside of Canada.

Is there a secret sauce for determining fair market value (FMV) rates in emerging markets? It certainly can get complicated in a constantly changing global economy. In an article for Policy and Medicine, Mario Prohasky, of Polaris, suggests companies should update their FMV rates when macroeconomic changes occur. For example, when an annual inflation rate exceeds 10% to 15%, or a local currency experiences a devaluation of 20% or more, a company should re-evaluate its FMV rates.

HHS is asking Boston Scientific to carve out a little information related to one of its products. In a regulatory filing, the company revealed that the OIG has asked for information regarding the 2008 launch of two of its defibrillators.

On the physician spend front, the total cost of payments to physicians and hospitals in Massachusetts dropped between 2011 and 2012. While recently released data shows a 12% drop in the total amount of payments, the number of payments actually increased. This can be credited to the change in the Massachusetts law that allows companies to provide modest meals. Spending on food (barbecue and otherwise) was up 65%.

Eli Lilly is disputing the ingredients it’s been accused of using at one of its manufacturing plants. The company was fined $450 million by a Brazilian court for allegedly exposing employees to hazardous materials at the plant. Lilly is appealing the decision, saying the chemicals to which the plaintiffs claim they were exposed were not used in manufacturing. Lilly also claims the court’s ruling is based on bad math and “inaccurate scientific claims.”

And with that, we bring this week’s feast of compliance news to a close. If you’re wondering if your compliance training curriculum offers the right list of ingredients, the PharmaCertify™ suite of eLearning modules and mobile apps offers comprehensive and up-to-date training on the regulations and policies your learners need to understand as they interact with healthcare professionals.

Have a great week everyone!

Week in Review, May 5, 2014

UCLA settles with a surgeon over conflicts of interest, CMS announces a timeframe for Phase 2 of Open Payments data submission, qui tam lawyers pour through the recently released Medicare payment data and PhRMA weighs in on simplifying product warning information.

Not so long ago in a galaxy…well, right here…the greatest achievement in cinema was celebrated (yes, we’ll admit it, we’re often given to hyperbole). With all due respect to Bogie and Bacall and Orson Welles, we’re of course referring to this past weekend when the Fourth of May was with us, and we celebrated Star Wars Day. Then, on Monday we had to deal with the Revenge of the Fifth. Rather fitting don’t you think? If Star Wars isn’t your particular cup of blue milk, feel free to jump right to the earthly compliance news of the week with this issue of the News in Review.

10,000 credits in advance may get you a ride on the Millennium Falcon, but it took 10 million dollars to settle a retaliation suit between a UCLA surgeon and the University of California Board of Regents. The surgeon, who was head of the orthopedic surgery department, raised concerns about physicians’ financial relationships with medical device companies. He claims his complaints were ignored and he was then denied patient referrals and prevented from participating in grants. In settling, UCLA claims it chose “to end a prolonged conflict and permit UCLA Health Sciences to refocus on its primary missions of teaching, research, patient care and community engagement.”

Open Payments: Episode 2, coming soon to an industry company near you. CMS has announced that applicable manufacturers can expect Phase 2 of Open Payments data submission to be open late May or early June. During Phase 2, applicable manufacturers and GPOs should:

  • Register any authorized officials not registered during Phase 1
  • Complete the registration for entity and the authorized official (supplemental information is required)
  • Verify entity profile information is correct
  • Upload, verify and attest to accuracy of payment data

Additional roles within the Open Payments system may also be assigned during Phase 2. CMS is preparing tutorial videos to assist applicable manufacturers and GPOs with implementation.

Qui tam lawyers have been mining the recently released Medicare payment data almost as aggressively as the Empire mined the Tibanna gas mines at Bespin (wow, we went full out geek there). The organization known as Taxpayers Against Fraud has lawyers pouring through the data looking for physicians who prescribe high numbers of a particular product. Obtaining this type of data previously required a subpoena. Is this a foreshadowing of what to expect once Sunshine data is released? Sunshine data might be used to demonstrate alleged instances of kickbacks, or infer that a company is involved in off-label marketing when a physician’s specialty doesn’t align with the approved use of a product.

They may not be well-liked by the hard core fans, but the Ewoks certainly proved the power of “keeping it simple.” Seriously, a bunch of teddy bears held off the Empire with rocks and logs! PhRMA appears to share this simplicity sentiment when it comes to the warnings in DTC ads. When the FDA asked for comments regarding a study focused on whether simplified warning information would help patients better understand the risks, PhRMA didn’t hesitate to voice its opinion. The organization believes shorter or less-complex warnings would help patients understanding the risks and motivate patients and healthcare providers to seek additional information about the drug.

With Phase 2 of Open Payments registration and data submission about to begin and the data publication expected not too far in the distant future, the Sunshine Act is burning brighter than the two suns of Tatooine. Make sure your team understands the nuances of the law The Sunshine Act: The Federal Physician Spend and Disclosure Law from the PharmaCertify™ suite of off-the-shelf eLearning modules.

Well folks that brings us to the end of this episode. Have a great week, and may the Force be with you!

Week in Review, March 17, 2014

In this issue…a look back on Caronia and its impact (if any), China cracks down on medical device websites, Teva settles improper allegations involving one of its subsidiaries and the FDA chastises one company for its product claims on Facebook.

Top o’ the morning, afternoon and evening to you! This may be the Ides of March, but we’ll put that aside and focus on the fun of St. Patrick’s Day instead. If this is March 17th, spring must be right around the corner and this must be Lá Fhéile Pádraig! Hopefully, you wore enough green today to avoid the pinch of those dastardly leprechauns. Pass the corned beef and cabbage, cue the bagpipes and straighten your kilts…it’s time for this week’s O’News in Review!

More than a year has passed since the Caronia decision, but it hasn’t exactly been the lucky charm some thought it would be for the industry. The decision supported the argument that truthful, non-misleading statements regarding off-label uses were protected by the First Amendment. However, the government distinguishes the application of the decision as it applies to the Food, Drug, and Cosmetics Act from how it applies to the False Claims Act (FCA). The government has argued that Caronia has no bearing on cases brought under the FCA because the Act applies to any conduct, including off-label promotion, that results in the submission of a false claim being submitted. For the foreseeable future at least, the government is as committed as always to pursue cases involving off-label promotion.

The Chinese government thinks that some medical device websites have taken the gift of gab a bit too far. The country’s State Food and Drug Authority has reported ten websites to the authorities for publishing false information about medical devices. The discovery is particularly concerning to the global med tech industry since several of the sites have allegedly forged the names of medical device manufacturers and posted fake equipment.

Teva Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. has agreed to part with a wee bit o’ green ($27.6 million) to settle allegations that one of their subsidiaries made improper payments to a physician.  According to the government, the Teva subsidiary, IVAX, funded vacations to Miami for the doctor, his family, friends and staff. The doctor is facing civil charges in Illinois federal court.

Closing the discrepancy between what medical device manufacturers report for physician spend and what those physicians disclosed may take more than just a little luck, according to a new study by Yale. The study compared the spend disclosures posted on the Medtronic and DePuy websites against what the physicians had disclosed. More than half of the information on Medtronic’s website was not in line with what the physicians reported and the discrepancy rate at DePuy was 30%. The study’s director says the errors go both ways, and he is concerned the public will assume that physicians are trying to hide something when that is not the case.

The International Society of Medical Publication Professionals has reevaluated its recommendations regarding support for medical publications and Sunshine reporting. In its previous recommendation, the organization suggested that all support from an applicable manufacturer was reportable. Now it recommends members consider who would benefit from the publication. For example, if the support provided by the manufacturer helps an author publish a study that the manufacturer would have an ethical obligation to publish anyway, then that support is not reportable.

The FDA has issued an Untitled Letter to a pharmaceutical manufacturer over content on the company’s Facebook page. According to the letter, statements on the page touted the benefits of the drug without revealing any of the risks. In addition to failing to report potential risks, the company omitted important “approved use” information from the product label.

With that, we end this emerald edition of the News in Review. While the celebration of St. Patrick may be filled with talk of good luck and the proverbial pot of gold, compliance training is not something you want to leave to chance. That’s why our PharmaCertify™ suite of off-the-shelf modules cover the critical topics, like on-label promotion and the Sunshine Act, your colleagues need to integrate good promotional practices into their daily activities.

Have a great week everyone!

News Week in Review, March 10, 2014

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!

Week in Review, February 17, 2014

A look back at 2013 FCPA enforcement reveals trends for the future, Brazil enacts an anti-bribery law of its own, at least one attorney wonders if Sunshine will hamper qui tam cases, and the FDA wants medical device adverse event reports submitted electronically.

Well, it’s President’s Day – certainly, one of the more interesting American holidays in terms of its evolution. From what we’re told by the folks at the history channel, the holiday was originally created to celebrate George Washington’s birthday. The shift to “President’s Day” is somewhat convoluted but suffice to say, it was part of the Uniform Monday Holiday, which was passed in 1971 and was intended to create more three day weekends for the nation’s workers, while fighting employee absenteeism by ensuring that holidays fell on the same weekday. Whew! Now that we are all clear on that, let’s focus on something a lot easier to understand, the compliance news of the week, in the News in Review.

Speaking of history, we begin this week with a look back at the DOJ’s enforcement of the FCPA for clues to future trends. Not surprisingly, the scope of FCPA enforcement widened in 2013, and the average cost of resolving increased to $80 million last year. New industries felt the brunt of the Act, with apparel manufacturer, Ralph Lauren, and ATM manufacturer, Diebold, entering into settlements with the government to settle charges. The agencies also expanded their investigatory search beyond written documents to business communication in general, with one representative of a mining company being charged with witness tampering based on a secretly recorded conversation.

A new bribery law  had its inauguration at the end of January. Brazil’s Clean Companies Act went into effect on January 29th. The law allows for the prosecution of  acts of bribery committed by Brazilian companies or foreign companies with a registered affiliate in Brazil. Unlike the FCPA and UK Bribery Act, the Clean Companies Act only carries civil penalties.

Holiday or not, Teva may not be a celebratory mood. The company announced it was under investigation by the government for the marketing practices related to two of its drugs. The government requested documents dating back to 2006 as it conducts the investigation.

From the land adjacent to the “land of Lincoln” comes an announcement of a program designed to educate medical students about the inner workings of the pharmaceutical industry. Eli Lilly is rolling out a four week rotational program where students will experience the various aspects of the drug development process and how physicians contribute to that process. The program will be conducted at Tulane University’s School of Medicine.

On the legal front, during a National Disclosure Summit, a qui tam attorney said Sunshine data could hamper qui tam cases more than it could help. The attorney said relators will have a harder time getting past the False Claims Act “public disclosure bar,” which requires relators to file their claims before information is in the public domain. On the other hand, the Sunshine data will add instant credibility to  a whistleblower’s claims, according to the same attorney. The data can also support an “inference of off-label marketing.”

The FDA announced that beginning in August of 2015, adverse event reports related to medical devices will need to be submitted electronically. The move, which is part of an initiative to improve operations, is expected to save the FDA $1.9 million each year. Companies will save too, but only after an estimated $38 – $42 million dollar investment to upgrade their own systems and procedures.

And so ends this week’s News in Review. With the end of another February in site, now is the time to launch updated product promotion training for 2014. The customizable PharmaCertify™ eLearning module, Good Promotional Practices offers the training your field staff needs on critical topics like gifts, meals and entertainment; advisory boards; and speaker programs.

Have a great week everyone!

 

Week in Review, February 10, 2014

A device maker settles kickback charges, the Serious Fraud Office looks to beef up the UK Bribery Act, and the FDA makes plans to release more guidance on social media.

The Super Bowl, National Signing Day and the Olympics all in one week; it was a sports fan’s trifecta! Hopefully your team won the game…signed that all important recruit…or took home the early gold! As the best of the best gather in Russia and you keep track of the medal count (Canada, Netherlands and Norway are tied for the early lead), we’ll keep tabs on the world of life sciences compliance. It’s time to light the torch on this week’s News in Review.

That big curling match is about to start in Sochi, and darn it, today is the day you left home without your smartphone. No worries. According to a new study, your healthcare provider  should have one you can borrow. The study finds that the vast majority of physicians are toting smartphones and about 70% have tablets. They’re putting the devices to use in their practice with the tablets being the tool of choice for content heavy tasks.

Device maker CareFusion recently spent some time in the penalty box. The company agreed to pay $40.1 million to settle charges it concealed kickbacks to a physician and marketed its surgical prep solution for off label uses.

Serious Fraud Office chief, David Green, wants to change the rules related to the Bribery Act. Green is proposing an amendment to the Act that would subject companies to fines and blacklisting if those companies fail to prevent financial crime by their employees. The law currently has a provision whereby companies are held liable for failing to prevent bribery. Green says the new power would only be used in “exceptional cases.”

Fortunately, we can look forward to more commentary on research and drug marketing during 2014. The FDA is expected to release more guidance on the use of social media in drug marketing, and guidance on the electronic submission of promotional labeling and advertising. The OIG plans to investigate issues around the price of drugs, including whether off-label uses should be reimbursable. For more in depth expert analysis of the OIG Work Plan, check out the video released by OIG, during which representatives discuss the agencies top priorities for the year and emerging trends in combating healthcare waste.

Speaking of the FDA, the agency may be ready to step up its enforcement of the regulations prohibiting off-label promotion. At a recent conference, an attorney for Pfizer, Emily Wright, noted that the industry should expect to see an increase in enforcement in the near future. Wright made note that the FDA issued two letters related to press releases in 2012 and she expects to see more.

And finally entering the stadium (cue the triumphant fanfare)…Open Payments registration! CMS has announced that beginning February 18th, registration and data submission will commence in two phases. During the first phase (February 18th – March 31st), users can register in CMS’ Enterprise Portal, and submit corporate profile information and 2013 aggregate data. Phase two will kick off in May.

Well that’s it for this edition of the News in Review. As you marvel at the accomplishments of the world’s greatest athletes this week, don’t forget to take the time to analyze your compliance curriculum for areas that need enhanced training. PharmaCertify™ off-the-shelf modules and mobile apps offer up-to-date content on topics like, on-label promotion, good promotional practices and the Sunshine Act, where your staff needs it most–in the field and at their fingertips.

Have a gold medal week everyone!

Week in Review, February 4, 2014

Industry teams with HCPs to formulate a framework for ethical collaboration, medical device companies are advised to keep their compliance programs robust, and pharmaceutical companies disagree on the Sunshine Act as it relates to support for medical writing.

How about that Super Bowl Sunday! No doubt there were cheers, laughs and maybe even a few tears shed as you and your friends gathered to watch the best of the best compete. Of course, we’re talking about this year’s Super Bowl commercials! And, yes, there was a football game played (sort of) in between those delightful bits of entertainment. The array of commercials included some that were memorable and humorous (that bizarrely fun Audi “Doberhuahua” spot) and many that we found downright confusing (Axe “Kiss for Peace?”). While it might not be as memorable as that Radio Shack spot, we like to think that this week’s News in Review is a production worthy of your time and attention.

Huddle up! A group representing the pharmaceutical industry, healthcare providers and patient advocacy organizations recently published a framework for ethical collaboration. The framework is designed to foster collaborations that further patient care, and it is supported by four ethical principles: put patient’s first; support ethical research; ensure independence and ethical conduct; and promote transparency and accountability. The group says regular information sharing and communication between patients, practitioners and the industry is vital to improving health and advancing medical knowledge.

Biotech and small medical device companies need to be sure they stay aggressive on offense when addressing FCPA compliance. Since biotech and medical device products often require additional approvals that increase the level of interaction with government officials, the risk of FCPA violations also increase. With life sciences companies in the cross-hairs of enforcement agencies, companies need to make sure their compliance programs are robust and comprehensive.

Share clinical trial results you will. Janssen announced it will share some of its clinical trial data through the Yale School of Medicine’s Open Data Access Project (otherwise known as YODA). YODA will serve as the vetting agent for clinical trial data requests from researchers and physicians. Some requests for the data will still be handled by Janssen R&D directly.

A federal judge is allowing a whistleblower case against Abbott to continue. A former sales rep filed the suit, alleging the company paid kickbacks and promoted its drug TriCor for off-label uses. Abbott moved to dismiss the case because the whistleblower failed to provide specific evidence of a false claim being submitted. The judge rejected those allegations.

Pharma companies are not reading the signals from the Sunshine Act the same when it comes to medical writing support. During the International Society for Medical Publication Professionals’ European meeting, representatives from several pharmaceutical companies revealed how their companies were handling medical writing support provided to authors of clinical studies, and not all companies agreed that there was any real transfer of value to physicians. AstraZeneca and Pfizer representatives said there was value to the author. Shire, on the other hand, saw the only value was to the company, and there was no need to report medical writing support. The Shire representative said they were collecting the information in case it ultimately has to be reported, but that the company was confident in its approach.

And with that, the clock has run out on this week’s News in Review. If you attended last week’s Pharmaceutical Compliance Congress, you heard industry peers and government regulators emphasize the need for an up-to-date compliance program that extends training beyond the check-the-box approach. The PharmaCertify™ suite of off-the-shelf compliance solutions offers the eLearning modules and mobile apps you need to extend critical compliance policies to where your team needs it most – in the field and at their fingertips.

Have a great week everyone!

Week in Review, Holiday Edition

With the holidays approaching, one co-pay charity falls onto the “not so nice” list, whistleblowers get the gift of protection against retaliation, and the state of Maryland finds an extra present of its own.

Well, here we are in the final stretches of the Christmas shopping season and either you’re resting peacefully, content in the knowledge that your mad dashes through mall mania are behind you, or you’re in full “take whatever is left on the shelf” panic mode. As you unwind with a cup of eggnog and a slice of recycled fruitcake, we offer a compliance-themed distraction of our own, with this edition of the News Week in Review.

Tis the season for giving, but at least one charity needs to be careful about the process. The Chronic Disease Fund (C.D.F), which provides co-pay assistance to patients with chronic conditions, has come under scrutiny for its relationship with pharmaceutical industry donors. Questions were raised in investor publications about the relationship between the charity and pharmaceutical manufacturers. C.D.F. has hired a law firm to review its practices and recommend new policies to comply with legal requirements. The organization’s president/founder has resigned.

In the spirit of the season, the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee wants to give whistleblowers the gift of protection against retaliation. The Committee approved the Criminal Antitrust Anti-Retaliation Act of 2013 to protect whistleblowers involved in antitrust cases. The bill will allow for recourse against retaliation through a cause of action in civil court, through which compensatory damages would be possible. The bill has been sent to the House for approval.

Maryland is getting a little extra in its stocking this year since GSK has agreed to a $15 million settlement with the state over accusations the company improperly marketed three diabetes drugs. The suit was filed under Maryland’s False Health Claims Act. The company allegedly touted the drugs as being superior to competitive products, without justification, and allegedly neglected to share information about the heart disease risks associated with the drugs.

Speaking of GSK, the company announced it will no longer pay doctors to promote its drugs, and it will no longer pay for physicians to attend medical conferences. According to CEO Andrew Witty, the moves have nothing to do with the current investigation into the company’s business practices in China, but are rather an ongoing effort to “stay in step with how the world is changing.” The plans should be rolled out globally by 2016. The company also announced that starting in 2015 it will no longer compensate sales representatives based on the number of prescriptions written by doctors on a global basis. The revised compensation policy is already in place in the U.S.

The head of the Canadian Medical Association is among those caroling the approval of the move by GSK. The CMA president said it was a welcome change, and should serve as a “wake up call” for those who are too “cozy” with the industry. He said the CMA has had rules regarding relationships with industry companies for some time, and that he hopes the move by GSK will promote a larger transparency discussion in Canada.

With the final shopping hours ticking away, we won’t keep you from your appointed rounds (or from your happy dance if you happen to be in the “woo hoo I’m all done” category) any longer. We leave you with a reminder that if comprehensive compliance training on topics like on-label promotion, adverse events and the Sunshine Act are still on your own gift list, the modules and mobile apps available through the PharmaCertify™ suite of solutions offer  up-to-date and customizable content where your staff needs it most – in the field and at their fingertips.

Have a great holiday everyone!

Week in Review, October 21, 2013

A U.S Senator calls for an investigation into the relationship between pharmaceutical companies and the FDA, the definition of “foreign official” under the FCPA is debated in Florida, the Baycol False Claims Act case moves forward and 25 manufacturers settle with Vermont over charges of failing to file required reports.

The World Series gets underway this Wednesday with the Cardinals returning after a one year hiatus to face a scraggly, scrappy Red Sox squad. With the team from Boston representing the American League, no doubt the boys from St. Louis have gained a new legion of fans in New York. So, do you have a side in the battle, or will you just be glad when it’s over, and you can get back to The New Girl and Sleepy Hollow? Whether you’re looking forward to the first pitch or the last, we’re here to help fill the time with the current version of the News in Review.

U.S. Senator, Joe Manchin, has put a call into a different type of commissioner to investigate an alleged pay-for-play scheme between the FDA and pharmaceutical companies. In the letter to FDA commissioner Margaret Hamburg, Senator Manchin expresses concern about reports of pharmaceutical companies paying thousands of dollars to attend FDA advisory meetings about the safety of pain medication. He would like to see a full senate investigation into the allegations to shed light on whether the relationship between pharma companies and the FDA caused any delay in the rescheduling of addictive pain killers.

A meeting on the mound is needed to settle an FCPA case in Florida. The case is now in the hands of three judges, and at the crux of the discussion is everyone’s favorite topic – the definition of a foreign official. More specifically, the case focuses on the definition of an “instrumentality.” Two telecom executives are accused of bribing the government-owned Haiti Teleco and defense lawyers have argued that an instrumentality has to be a direct part of the government under the FCPA, which is not the case with Haiti Teleco.

Internal controls charges are on the rise in FCPA cases, leading the Cadwalader law firm to wonder if the DOJ and SEC are poised to begin charging independent directors for failing to assure or maintain proper controls. Several companies have faced such charges recently, and as was demonstrated in the Orthofix case, companies can be charged with a violation for not having financial controls or an adequate compliance program in place. The FCPA guidance states that compliance begins with board members and senior executives, so the idea of independent directors being charged for the lack of proper controls isn’t far-fetched.

Upon further review, a whistleblower case against Bayer will move forward, but only on the grounds that the Department of Defense was defrauded, not federal healthcare programs. The False Claims Act case, which alleges that Bayer was deceptive in its marketing of Baycol, was dismissed last year because the court said the whistleblower failed to meet the specificity threshold related to false claims. The appeals court reversed the lower court’s decision.

Boston Scientific and its Guidant division have agreed to pay $30 million to settle charges of knowingly selling defective heart devices to facilities that treat Medicare patients. The government alleged that despite being aware of the problem, Guidant continued to sell defective stock and sent misleading communications to doctors in attempt to hide the true nature of the defect. The government also alleged that Guidant attempted to hide the defect from the FDA.

Vermont racked up 25 strikes against manufacturers under its Prescribed Products Gift Ban and Reporting law. The state’s Attorney General recently announced settlements with 25 manufacturers for alleged violations of the law. Most of the companies involved were small manufacturers and most of the charges levied were for failure to file the required reports. One manufacturer faced six charges of violating the gift ban.

We close with a reminder that the PharmaCertify team will be on-site at the Fourteenth Annual Pharmaceutical Regulatory and Compliance Congress next week. So if you’re attending, don’t forget to stop by the booth, say hi, and ask about our suite of compliance training modules and apps.

Have a great week everyone.