pharmaceutical compliance

Compliance News in Review, July 5, 2016

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

Another organization calls for a ban on Direct to Consumer advertising, two former industry sales reps are arrested for kickbacks, a former executive is acquitted on kickback charges, and CMS releases update TOV data.

Strike up the band and light up the fireworks! The American Experiment marked its 240th year this weekend. So, it’s fitting that the hottest ticket on Broadway these days is the story of one our nation’s founders. Since most of us won’t be lucky enough (or rich enough) to score tickets to Hamilton in celebration , we had to stick with the old standbys of parades, barbecues, fireworks. To cap the holiday weekend, we offer a new tradition to add to the list, the Independence Day edition of the Compliance News in Review.

The fireworks continue regarding DTC advertising. The American Society of Health-System Pharmacists is the latest group to express a desire to see DTC advertising of prescription drugs banned. In the past, the organization has been supportive of the advertising, as long as it meets certain criteria. Since it now believes the industry is ignoring the criteria, the group has withdrawn its support. A spokesperson says a complete ban is not possible, but he hopes this action will lead to a discussion between industry and healthcare providers about DTC ads. The current model of DTC advertising is outdated according to the spokesperson, and pharmacists and providers are spending too much time explaining to patients why drugs they see in ads are not appropriate for them.

A pair of former Insys sales representatives could be losing their independence in the near future. The two were arrested for allegedly paying over $250,000 in kickbacks to doctors who wrote prescriptions for the painkiller fentanyl. The complaint alleges that most of the money was paid for serving as speakers at programs that were essentially social functions. Very little, if any, educational information was shared, according to the complaint, and following the programs, the sales reps would often take the doctors out for drinks and other entertainment. In a statement, the company says the sales reps were no longer employed and company policy prohibits the giving of cash or other items of value as inducements for writing prescriptions.

It was no tea party in Boston for the feds in a case against a former Warner-Chilcott executive. W. Carl Reichel was acquitted of charges that he paid kickbacks to doctors. Prosecutors charged that the former executive created a strategy of paying kickbacks to doctors in the form of sham speaking fees, money, and free meals in exchange for writing prescriptions of Warner-Chilcott drugs. US Attorney Carmen Ortiz said the charges against Mr. Reichel were warranted, and while cases against executives are difficult to prove, they’re necessary to deter improper conduct.

CMS sent out its annual declaration about Open Payments data. The payment and transfer of value data has been published, and is now publicly accessible. This year’s data represents nearly 12 million records covering $7.52 billion paid to physicians and teaching hospitals. As usual, research payments account for the largest share of the total amount.

This edition of the News in Review reminds us that the consequences of non-compliant behavior can be quite personal. When the big headlines tend to be about the multi-million and multi-billion dollar settlements paid to settle charges of fraud and non-compliance, convincing individuals that there is also a price to pay can be challenging. Citing cases like these in your training is one way to inform commercial staff and executives of those consequences.

While we don’t advocate turning compliance training into something akin to “Scared Straight,” sharing the full landscape of government enforcement actions is important. This is especially true following last year’s memo from Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates about the DOJ’s emphasis on holding individuals accountable in cases of corporate wrongdoing.

That’s it for this edition of the Compliance News in Review. Stay compliant!

Buy or Build: Is Off-the-Shelf or Custom Online Compliance Training Right for You?

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

During a recent compliance conference panel session, a chief compliance officer from a mid-size pharmaceutical company proclaimed, “I only use custom for online training,” and “off-the-shelf just doesn’t meet my content needs.” She went on to explain that with custom-developed training, she could target specific topics and include company-specific policies in a way that she never could with off-the-shelf.

Fair point, but she failed to take into consideration that while custom-developed training can indeed be built to focus on the compliance content she needs to cover, well-built, flexible off-the-shelf training provides a solid foundation of knowledge, which can then be supplemented with targeted, custom micro-learning in the future, as gaps and custom needs demand.

Start with Off-the-Shelf

Small to mid-size pharmaceutical and medical device companies need effective training covering core topics such as off-label promotion, transparency, gifts and meals, and adverse events, but the training resources and budgets available to many compliance departments, which often consist of a staff of one or two, are quite limited. Instructionally sound, industry-focused, off-the-shelf training can easily and quickly provide core compliance training, without draining your limited resources and time.

For obvious reasons, off-the-shelf, even when tailored to include your specific policies and contact information, can be deployed more quickly than a fully custom training course. Review times are shortened and less demanding, and when a need for training on a specific topic (e.g., speaker presentations) is identified, off-the-shelf gives you the flexibility to deploy rapidly while the topic is still top of mind to your learners. Moreover, with quality off-the-shelf training, content is developed by someone with specific knowledge of the industry, and expertise in commercial compliance. Therefore, your time isn’t consumed with being the primary subject matter expert.

A Time and Place for Custom

This is a need for custom online learning in an effective compliance training curriculum – one that addresses all of your organizational risks and truly helps to build a positive compliance culture. The most recent research points to the importance of spacing learning over time and providing review and reinforcement exercises after the initial training is launched to improve retention. As educational psychologist Steven Just, Ed.D., founder and former CEO of the assessment company, Pedagogue, writes, “To learn, you must cognitively act upon the learning materials, and to retain what you have learned, you must actively re-engage with the learning repeatedly over a period of time.” Starting with off-the-shelf, then mixing in smaller, more cost effective, custom mini modules and interactivities (video scenarios, games, assessments) over time and across a well thought out compliance training plan, has been proven to support on-going behavior change – a key objective in the world of commercial compliance.

Summary

While custom online compliance training should certainly play a role in the on-going execution of your compliance training plan, launching a foundation of targeted, off-the-shelf courses to address important topics to a broad audience represents a rational and cost-effective starting point for any life sciences company’s compliance training curriculum.

Don’t forget to “follow” the PharmaCertify™ blog by clicking the blue link on the right so you don’t miss our updates. Coming soon, The Right Stuff: What Compliance Topics to Cover in Your Product Launch Training.

Thanks for reading and stay compliant!

Sean Murphy, Product and Marketing Manager PharmaCertify by NXLevel Solutions

News in Review, June 15, 2016

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

Federal investigators subpoena information related to charitable organizations from three companies, Congress proposes an amendment to the FDCA, the head of the FDA speaks on off-label information, and New Hampshire’s Attorney General targets the manufacturer of a popular painkiller.

The temperatures are rising well past 70 degrees Fahrenheit and that can only mean one thing…time to hit the beach! Pack up the station wagon, minivan, or whatever mode of transportation best accommodates your gear and head to the sand and surf for some fun and relief from the heat! Of course, the standard precautions and warnings are in order: use plenty of sunscreen; mind the flags regarding ocean conditions; and above all, be wary of teens resembling Frankie Avalon and Annette Funicello bursting into fits of random dancing and singing (now there’s a dated reference for you). Of course, you’ll need plenty of reading material before you drift off into a coconut oil scented daydream. So after you finish the latest from Mary Higgins Clarke or that true crime tome, please enjoy the next best beach read…this edition of the Compliance New in Review.

The waves of compliance just got slightly chopping for a trio of drug manufacturers. Three companies, Gilead, Jazz and Biogen, received subpoenas from federal investigators for information related to their relationships with charitable organizations that help patients with medication costs. Charities receiving support from industry companies claim those companies have no say or influence on which patients they help or what drugs are covered. The government’s concern centers on whether the contributions are essentially illegal kickbacks.

Oh sunny day – a panel of the House of Representatives Energy and Commerce Committee proposed an amendment to the Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act that would allow companies more leeway in sharing truthful off-label information. The proposed amendment would limit the definition of intended use to the manufacturer’s “objective intent,” and allow for the dissemination of materials for scientific exchange, if the information in the materials is backed by scientific evidence. The panel expressed concern about the need for doctors to be kept abreast of the latest medical information, and frustration at the lack of movement by the FDA on guidance related to the dissemination of off-label information.

The head of the FDA also rode the off-label promotion wave when he spoke at the BIO International Convention. In his remarks, Robert Califf noted that supportable information worth sharing should be included on the product’s label, and he questioned why companies would not include useful information on the label or in the prescribing information. Califf also encouraged the industry to embrace social media, saying, “the best way to develop products in the future is likely going to involve a lot of people with diseases to have a handle on what their needs are, what their expectations are, and what their risk tolerance may be.”

As expected, Vermont was first in the water with a law requiring transparency of drug pricing. State officials will identify 15 drugs for which they want information about the reasons for price increases. The manufacturers of those drugs will have to submit information to justify the price increases.

New Hampshire Attorney General’s office has filed suit against Purdue over the company’s refusal to provide documents related to the marketing of OxyContin. The AG’s office claims the company is providing HCPs with misleading information regarding the product. The suit claims the company touts the drug lasts for 12 hours, and it also does not appropriately address end-of-dose failure. The AG also claims the company downplays the risks associated with addiction. Purdue says it is more than willing to cooperate with the investigation, provided the AG’s office does not share any documentation with private attorneys. The company believes a financial conflict of interest exists with the firm retained to assist in the investigation, and it should not be compelled to turn over information while a court case is pending.

A report from Reuters questions the independence of firms hired by companies under a CIA to serve as an Independent Review Organization (IRO). Unlike other agencies, the Department of Health and Human Services does not prohibit companies under a CIA from hiring an IRO with which they have an existing relationship. Critics claim those arrangements represent a conflict of interest. A representative of the HHS Office of Inspector General (OIG) said she has not witnessed any issues with these arrangements. Spokespersons for various industry companies said they disclose all their business relationships to the OIG in advance.

The seas have also been choppy for Salix Pharmaceuticals recently. The company agreed to pay $54 million to settle allegations it provided kickbacks to physicians for prescribing its products. According to the DOJ, the company admitted to paying doctors to be speakers for the company as an inducement for prescribing its products. The government claims the programs at which the doctors spoke were largely social in nature and provided little or no information related to a product. In addition to resolving the federal case, the settlement will resolve several related state fraud cases.

That’s all for this edition of the News in Review. Until next time, we wish you safe sailing and calm compliance waters!

Compliance News in Review – In Case You Missed It, April 2016

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

Wow, we’re already a week into May 2016. Time flies when you’re staying compliant. If policy writing, auditing, monitoring, or compliance training development kept you too busy to keep up with all of the April compliance news, not to worry, we have a summary of all the compliance news that was fit to blog throughout the month…with the ICYMI, April 2016 edition of the Compliance News in Review.

A new study suggests drug ads aren’t particularly effective in prompting patients to discuss the advertised drug with their doctor. In fact, only 7% of people were moved to discuss a drug with their physician after seeing a televised ad. While they may not be motivated to speak to their physician, viewers do notice the ads. The survey found that 64% of the respondents said they believed they saw more drug ads over the past year.

Shionogi received a warning letter for omitting risk information on a co-pay coupon for a drug that treats lice. The FDA said the coupon touted the efficacy of the product without stating any of the risks.

The Department of Justice announced a pilot program for companies to self-report violations of the FCPA in exchange for reduced penalties. Under the program, companies that self-report and take steps to remediate identified problems will be eligible for the reduction in penalties.

Pfizer and the DOJ announced the settlement of the case involving Pfizer’s Wyeth unit. The company agreed to pay $784.4 million to resolve charges it had reported false and fraudulent price information to the government.

Ten of Canada’s top drug firms plan to voluntarily disclose aggregate physician and healthcare organization payment data. The movement was started by GSK Canada, and multinational firms like Abbvie, Purdue, BMS, and Lilly soon joined.

CMS held a webinar for Open Payments stakeholders. The agency’s remarks focused on program timelines, in particular, the review and dispute period. A question and answer session for participants was included.

The Massachusetts Medical Society is now requiring its members to disclose financial ties to industry when posting information or reviewing a medical procedure or service on the Internet.

With the review and dispute period for Open Payments in full swing, it is good time to make sure those in customer facing roles are up to date on the requirements of the Sunshine Act, and your company’s procedures for addressing questions from covered recipients. Sunshine Act and Open Payments, from the PharmaCertify Foundations™ curriculum of eLearning modules, provides an overview of data collection and reporting responsibilities, and is easily modified to include your company-specific policy on how to handle questions from covered recipients.

Stay compliant and here’s to a merry month of May!

News and Notes from the 13th Annual Pharmaceutical Compliance Congress

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

CBI’s 13th Annual Pharmaceutical Compliance Congress, held last week at the Ritz-Carlton in Washington DC, offered an impressive lineup of industry luminaries and government regulators discussing a wide range of compliance-related topics. While some of the discussions didn’t offer much in the way of groundbreaking information (tone at the top, embed compliance in the businesses, relationships matter, etc.), the concepts presented were critical for any attendees new to their role or the world of life sciences compliance in general.

Embed Compliance into Business Practices

There was the expected emphasis on the concepts of embedding compliance into business practices and gaining buy-in from the C-suite. One panelist even mentioned that when asked to join her current company, she insisted that she be a member of the North American leadership team and therefore have direct access to the business leaders. As another speaker put it, “relationships matter, and you have to speak the language of the businesses in their terms.”

Tie Compliance to Incentives

One compliance officer from a small pharmaceutical company referenced the need to make sure sales incentive is tied to compliance, to make the concepts and policies more meaningful – a concept that was considered revolutionary in the industry just a few years ago. She added that sales management needs to own the compliance metrics in order for there to be lasting and real change. The same global officer touched on the challenges of doing business globally and the need to have tough conversations about spending caps. “You will get pushback,” she stressed, “but don’t compromise. There’s no need to take that kind of risk.”

Transparency: Think Globally, Act Locally

Continuing on the global front, presenters reviewed the merits and details of global transparency codes like EFPIA, while touching on upcoming movements toward laws and guidance. When dealing with global regulations and codes, the potential for confusion reigns. For example, when providing meals to HCPs from various countries, one panelist advised audience members to use the lowest common denominator for the meal limit, BUT, don’t forget to take Loi Bertrand into consideration if an HCP happens to be from France.

In addition, panelists stressed that companies can’t fall into the trap of thinking that because they are familiar with the rules around the Sunshine Act and Open Payments, they can roll right into global reporting. As one speaker from a large pharmaceutical company suggested, you have to look at it differently. “If you approach it like you approach Open Payments, your credibility will be challenged.”

Yates Memo and Individual Culpability

Among the regulators and defense attorneys who spoke during the conference, one common theme was the Yates Memo, and the affect it has (or is some cases, doesn’t have) on how investigations are conducted and cases prosecuted. The Memo, which is named for Department of Justice Deputy Sally Quillian Yates, was released in September of 2015. It generally states that the DOJ will increasingly target individuals in corporate crimes. A number of the regulators stressed that while the Memo is significant in its scope, it will not necessarily change how their offices pursue pharmaceutical and medical device cases. During the U.S. Healthcare Fraud Enforcement Panel, one US Attorney said it “codifies what they have already been doing in her office” and another commented that he asks his prosecutors to always look at individual culpability in each case.

Innovations in Training

As a compliance-focused learning company, we at PharmaCertify™ pay close attention to presentations and commentary with a slant toward training. It’s been a slow process, but based on the information and concepts presented in this and other recent conferences, it’s clear to us that companies are integrating exciting and novel techniques into their curriculums. Innovative compliance departments are adding micro-learning solutions and app-based tools in an effort to raise the level of engagement among their learners, which is music to our ears.

One company representative detailed the planning process and upfront analysis she and her colleagues conduct to ensure that training concepts meet the needs of the business as well as the compliance department. Once those needs are identified, they look for unique ways, including a healthy dose of humor, to make their messages stick. She and her co-presenter reviewed the details of the compliance app recently launched across the company, which uses self-produced video sequences, with compliance department employees as actors, to communicate the concepts. While we agree that technique can help to “humanize” compliance, as we warned in a recent post, you need to be careful that bad acting doesn’t distract from the important messages.

While this year’s Pharmaceutical Compliance Congress featured much of the same themes as recent conferences, the ever-evolving world of life sciences compliance always offers new twists and turns for those tasked with ensuring their individual companies remain in alignment with the latest rules and regulations. These conferences offer attendees the invaluable opportunity to learn best practices, tips, and updates directly from their peers and government regulators from around the world. They shouldn’t be missed.

See you at the next conference!

Compliance Edutrainment: Too Much of a Good Thing?

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

These days, the standard airline safety presentation is delivered via video on most aircraft. Somewhere along the way, airlines decided this approach was an opportunity to express their creative spirit, and a bit of a competition developed, with the imagined spoils going to the company that produces the most entertaining safety video. That competition reached a new level when Virgin America rolled out its Safety Dance video. It boasts talented singers and dancers (and one Olympian) delivering the FAA- required safety information. If the objective is simply to entertain, then mission accomplished. However, if the objective is to educate passengers about safety protocol, we’re not sure it hits the mark.

The world of compliance training has thankfully evolved beyond the “death by PowerPoint” approach that dominated the life sciences landscape years ago. Those charged with developing compliance training now look to create programs that are more engaging and entertaining. In the case of eLearning, a number of tools and techniques can be applied to deepen engagement and learning, but if overused, or misused, the same tools have the opposite effect and distract from the learning. We call this the Edutrainment Trap.

All good adult learning starts with objectives, answering the question, “What do I want the learner to know and be able to do by the end of this training?” Enamored with the latest tools and ideas, losing sight of objectives once we start to design and develop the learning is easy. Here are five tips to help keep your compliance organization from falling into the Edutrainment Trap:

  1. Use Interactivity Intelligently: The interactivity itself is often overused in online compliance training. Of course, a well thought-out level of interactivity is important, but overloading the interaction on every screen only serves to distract the learner from the salient points. When covering critical topics like off-label marketing and privacy, interactive exercises and games need to be integrated intelligently, and in a manner that doesn’t cloud the learning with unnecessary messages. Interactive elements should serve a purpose, and not just be included for the sake of entertainment.
  2. Include Targeted Imagery: Images and graphics are sometimes misused or overused in a way that distracts from the core objectives. There is truth to the phrase, “a picture is worth a thousand words” and well-placed imagery is certainly more engaging than an overabundance of text on screen. But when the objective is to ensure the learner can “demonstrate an understanding of the payments that need to be reported under the Sunshine Act,” pretty pictures only go so far. Relevant images and graphics that reinforce key concepts and support learning objectives are needed.
  3. Mind the Bandwidth: Video and animation offer exciting opportunities for compliance training, but like any new tools, they need to be utilized judiciously and with the objectives in mind. In this time of high-speed corporate networks, we can forget that bandwidth is sometimes an issue for third-party vendors. An overabundance of video or complex animations may cause problems. Think carefully about geography and access when developing that global transparency module for deployment around the world.
  4. Remember that Acting Counts: If live actors are being used, make sure the subject matter remains the star of the training. Oscar-quality acting isn’t necessary for the training to be effective, but there is a fine line between amusing amateur acting and just plain bad acting. When the goal is to communicate the seriousness of a topic like the Anti-kickback Statute and its implications, amateur acting will derail any hope for effectiveness, as the learners start to pay more attention to the acting, and not the learning. Similarly, the more conversational the dialogue, the better. If the narration sounds like someone is reading a law journal or compliance policy, learners will tune out.
  5. Be Mindful of Cultural Differences: Making cultural references or using humor can be a fun way to interject life into training, but it has to be included carefully. Jokes can lessen the importance of the message. Cultural references that the audience may not understand can frustrate and ultimately distract the learner, leaving them saying “huh?” instead of “I got it.” This safety video by Delta is a great example. The video is entertaining, funny, and clearly communicates the required safety information – all good things. However, if the learners are not familiar with the nature of viral videos and Internet stars, the humor is lost, and the random assortment of characters only leads to confusion.

Avoid the Edutrainment Trap of loading training with every bell and whistle imaginable in the effort to make the learning fun and engaging. A good balance of imagery, text, and interactivity keeps training interesting and flowing and is a necessity in today’s complex regulatory landscape. Understanding which techniques are most effective and appropriate for the learners and the subject matter is the key to developing effective and highly-engaging training.

Thanks for reading and stay compliant!

Compliance Buzz March 14, 2016 – Three Good Reasons to Pre-Disclose HCP Spend

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

To pre-disclose, or not to pre-disclose. That is the question.

Life science staffs are juggling multiple HCP spend transparency disclosure requirements these days. Managing those requirements can be a complex process, involving multiple systems and personnel dedicated to collecting and reporting the data. Teams charged with the management of spend transparency have to consider whether pre-disclosing the data, outside of what may be required by law, is a good idea.

Here are three reasons why we think the answer is yes:

1: It keeps HCP’s from being blindsided. Under most global transparency initiatives, data sent to regulatory bodies is made public, so it must be accurate. Pre-disclosure is one tool that can be used to facilitate that effort. Since the release of Open Payments data (and even before with ProPublica’s Dollars for Docs), local media outlets have featured stories about which doctors in their state or locality are receiving the most money from the industry. Pre-disclosure is one way to help HCPs be prepared for the information that will be released about them.

In addition, HCPs that have relationships with public medical institutions are required to disclose their relationships with industry companies. Discrepancies between what an HCP reports to a medical institution and what is disclosed through Open Payments or other transparency initiatives can be problematic for these HCPs. Pre-disclosure gives HCPs the opportunity to ensure that what they’ve reported, or will report, to these institutions aligns with what is disclosed to the public. Pre-disclosure demonstrates a true partnership between the company and the HCP.

2: It helps a company proactively address discrepancies . Pre-disclosing spend information throughout a reporting year allows for queries and disputed transactions to be addressed prior to any review period required by regulators. In fact, under Open Payments and the Medicines Australia’s Code of Conduct, the required review period is relatively short considering the volume of transactions open to dispute. Granted, wholesale  disputes of data are highly unlikely, however, just one or two disputes, multiplied  over an HCP universe of hundreds of practitioners, add up quickly. Spreading those disputes over time is a more effective approach.

3: It’s good customer service. During CBI’s 9th Annual Aggregate Spend and Transparency Forum, two panelists from the American Medical Association Board of Trustees noted that physicians were most concerned about accurate data being released to the public. The panelists emphasized that providing a website for physicians to review spend data prior to the Open Payments review period would help in alleviate those concerns.

For a reportable recipient, spend transparency initiatives are akin to consumer credit reporting. Information is being shared about their business relationships, yet they aren’t really part of the collection and data release process. Some transparency initiatives require a review period for reportable recipients, but reportable recipients then need to review a large amount of data at once, potentially from multiple sources. Pre-disclosure allows reportable recipients to review smaller chunks of spend data over time, rather than during a single short window. This helps customers better manage what they can control . That’s good customer service.

The bottom line: pre-disclosure is a good idea because it benefits the company responsible for reporting and the HCPs about whom information is being reported. When spend data is pre-disclosed,  HCPs have the opportunity to review that data for accuracy before it is submitted to regulatory agencies and the company is presented with a valuable opportunity to engage in a critical and proactive conversation with its HCP partners.

Compliance News in Review, March 8, 2016

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

A bill is introduced in the Senate to end DTC advertising, Endo settles with New York over alleged marketing violations, and Olympus settles multiple False Claims Act, Anti0kickback, and FCPA charges.

March has certainly roared in like a lion, but will it go out like a lamb? Or will it go out more like a Blue Devil, a Jayhawk, a Cardinal, or a Wolverine? March Madness is almost here, so rise up bracketologists! Whether you employ a highly-scientific method for filling out your brackets, or you make your picks based on which team colors, it’s time to put pen to paper (or fingers to keyboard) and make you selections official. Before you get completely engrossed in what sixteen seed might have a shot at the huge upset in the first round, let’s take a look at what has dribbled through the newswires lately, as we tip off on this edition of the Compliance News in Review.

Senator Al Franken is the latest to join the “Ban DTC Advertising” team. The Senator has introduced a bill that would end the DTC advertising tax break for drug companies. Franken argues the costs of the ads are increasing the costs of drugs, and they encourage consumers to seek new, expensive medications, over cheaper alternatives. A spokesperson for PhRMA said the legislation “ignores the value of information patients about their health care and treatment options,” and it may have the unintended consequence of a patient not seeking medical attention for chronic conditions that can be managed more cost effectively when treatment begins early.

Endo has resolved a marketing foul with the state of New York. The company reached a settlement with the State over its marketing of an opioid pain medication. According to the state’s Attorney General, Endo claimed its painkiller, Opana ER, was crush resistant and it underplayed the addictive nature of the drug. The AG said the misleading marketing led to increased sales of the drug because it created a “false sense of security.” The company agreed to pay $200,000 and to cease marketing the drug as crush resistant. Additionally, Endo must create a program to keep its sales team from promoting the drug to healthcare providers who may be prescribing it in an abusive manner.

Olympus Corporation of the Americas (OCA), has agreed to pay $646 million to settle criminal and civil charges related to violations of the False Claims Act, the federal Anti-kickback Statue and the FCPA. The endoscope maker was accused of paying kickbacks in the form of consulting payments; free endoscopes; travel; meals; and grants. The company will pay $312 million to settle charges of paying kickbacks and $310 million to resolve the False Claims Act charges. The company’s Latin American subsidiary is accused of making payments to healthcare providers working in government-owned hospitals in Central and South America in order to secure business. The company will pay $22.4 million to resolve charges it violated the FCPA and it has entered into a three year Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA) and a Corporate Integrity Agreement (CIA). The DPA requires the establishment of a confidential hotline, improvements to the compliance training and the establishment of a program to recoup executive performance pay for those who participate in misconduct or fail to promote compliance. The CIA requirements include the implementation of a healthcare code of conduct; specific training and education; and requirements around grants and charitable contributions, consulting arrangements, and travel expenses.

The DOJ noted in its press release about the Olympus settlement that “the criminal complaint alleges that the improper payments happened while Olympus lacked training and compliance programs.” A “subpar compliance program,” was also noted by prosecutors in the recent SciClone FCPA case and the Sweett Group UK Bribery Act case. Regular and effective training is a key element of any effective compliance program, and helps reduce the risk of violations. While laws such as the False Claims Act of the FCPA may not change often, training on these laws cannot be conducted in a “one and done” manner. It should be reviewed and refreshed regularly, and highlight real-world examples applicable to the industry to keep it relevant and fresh.

With that, the buzzer has sounded on this edition of the Compliance News in Review. If you have a rooting interest, good luck to your team(s) in the upcoming tournament.

Stay compliant and we’ll see you right back here for the next edition

Compliance Buzz™ February 29, 2016: Three observations from OPDP Notice of Violation Letters

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

Welcome to the first issue of PharmaCertify Compliance Buzz™!

From Corporate Integrity Agreements to FDA guidance documents, the material published by government enforcement entities offers valuable insight into the enforcement of healthcare laws and regulations. This holds true for Notice of Violation (NOV) and Warning letters issued by the FDA’s Office of Prescription Drug Marketing (OPDP). Regularly reviewing these letters as they are released is one way to ensure training about compliant product promotion is up-to-date and relevant.

So for this inaugural edition of Compliance Buzz™, we have reviewed the NOV and Warning letters OPDP issued over the last several years, and identified three trends to keep top of mind as you evaluate your compliance training program.

Focus on smaller companies. In recent years, the focus of OPDP letters has been small and medium-sized companies, rather than larger companies. In 2015, only three of the ten letters were issued to companies listed in the Scrip100 top 50 pharmaceutical companies. In 2014, only one letter was issued to a top 50 company, and in 2013, only five. Compare this to 2010, when 2/3 of the letters were to top 50 companies. While this doesn’t necessarily mean that OPDP is targeting smaller companies, it is a compelling trend to keep in mind, especially if your company falls into the small to medium-sized category.

Rise of Social Media. The OPDP is taking note of the industry’s Internet presence. Almost half the letters issued in 2014 and 2015 involved promotional information found on the Net, including posts on Facebook, Instagram, and Google Ads. The only letter issued thus far this year involves a YouTube post. The information required for promotional material doesn’t always align with the untamed spirit of social media, and it’s easy to assume that using links or other shortcuts to the required information is sufficient. As we all know, it’s not. As the industry continues to embrace social media as a promotional tool, training programs need to include content regarding the use of these platforms.

No risk, no reward. Omission of risk is one of the most often cited issues in letters sent by the OPDP over the last couple of years. Discussing the negative aspects of a product is not always comfortable for those responsible for promoting a product. However, for the pharmaceutical industry, it’s a requirement. Disclosure of product risks and benefits is a critical topic for training.

While the ODPD has issued significantly fewer letters in the last several years, there’s still much to be gleaned from the comments found in those letters. They are valuable touchstones for evaluating the content of your compliance training and offer important real-word examples to share with your learners.

Thanks for reading and stay compliant!

Compliance News in Review, December 10, 2015

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

One of the great traditions of the Christmas season is the performance of Tchaikovsky’s The Nutcracker by ballet companies and dance schools around the world. Whether performed by professionals or students, the ballet is full of magic and fantasy. A young girl, Clara (or Marie, depending on the production), receives a nutcracker, which comes to life, fights an army of giant rats, and then whisks Clara away to land of sweets ruled over by the Sugarplum Fairy. Almost as delightful as the prospects of watching giant rodents fight on stage is what’s been happening in the world of life science compliance. Places everyone! Time for the Compliance News in Review.

Standard Bank is taking a bow as the first company to enter into a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) with the Serious Fraud Office over violations of the U.K. Bribery Act. The company was accused of failing to prevent bribery by an allied person. The DPA remains in effect for three years and requires the bank to pay $32.6 million; submit to a review of its anti-bribery policies by an independent reviewer and make any changes recommended by the reviewer; and cooperate with authorities in any other matters that arise from the indictment.

It’s not a dream Clara, the DOJ announced it has recovered $3.5 billion in False Claims Act cases in 2015. As in years past, healthcare fraud represented the lion’s share of the recoveries. In 2015, healthcare fraud cases totaled nearly $2 billion. Cases against the pharma industry represented $96 million of that total. It was a good year for qui tam relators as well. Of the $2.8 billion recovered from qui tam cases, a record $1.1 billion came from cases in which the U.S. chose not to intervene.

Harvard Medical School has made a slight change to its conflict of interest policy. The school is relaxing a policy that prohibited faculty from accepting equipment or other support from a private company in which they have equity, or from a public company in which they hold equity of $30,000 or more. The school will now allow faculty conducting basic research to petition for an exclusion from the rule if they can show that the benefits of the research outweigh any potential conflict of interest. Faculty would also need to show they have measures in place to guard against conflicts of interest.

Physicians may need Uncle Drosselmeyer to come guide them through the Sunshine Act sine a new study shows professional medical organizations aren’t doing so. The study appeared in the journal, Postgraduate Medicine. Researchers reviewed 59 articles and found there was very little guidance regarding the Act, and professional associations tended to focus on sharing broad information about reporting requirements. Rarely was there information regarding payments for research grants, trial participating and medical publication. The authors conclude that expert guidance about the Final Rule itself is needed, and suggest a lack of guidance may impact physician investigators’ participation in clinical trials and publishing results.

Clara’s trip to the land of sweets may have all been a dream conjured up by the mysterious Drosselmeyer, but after years of anticipation, the SFO is making its promise of dealing with corporate bribery a reality. In addition to the Standard Bank DPA, another corporation was recently charged by the SFO with violating the U.K. Bribery Act by failing to prevent bribery. If the lack of prosecutorial action has made training on the U.K. Bribery Act a lower priority for you, now is the time to move it up the priority list. Likewise, if you haven’t trained on the Act recently, a refresher course may be in order to ensure employees and third parties are up to speed on the requirements and your company’s policies.

That’s a wrap for this edition of the Compliance News in Review. Keep dancing everyone…and stay compliant.