Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter

    My Profile

    • EXPERTISE -
      Authority on regulatory aspects of communications and medical products, with particular emphasis on pre-approval communications; strategist to help pharma and biotech companies prepare best case for advisory committee approval; issues and crisis management. Frequent speaker on various aspects of same - drug development, promotion, reimbursement and new media in a highly regulated environment. Author of books, newspaper and magazine pieces related to drug marketing and promotion as well as HIV specialty pieces. And of course... blogger!

    About This Blog

    • Eye on FDA is published by Mark Senak of Fleishman-Hillard's Washington, D.C. office. The thoughts and ideas in this blog and postings are strictly my own and are not screened by my employer. Everything posted on this blog is my personal opinion and does not necessarily represent the views of Fleishman-Hillard or its clients.

    My Favorite Dogs

    • January20063_005
      Nick and Nora

    Other Fleishman-Hillard Bloggers

    Stats

    • eXTReMe Tracker

    Eye on FDA edrugsearch blog ranking

    • Healthcare 100

    « Sales and Warnings | Main | Alert on MedWatch Alerts! »

    February 23, 2006

    Class of One - Avoiding Warning Letters, Part II

    J0385751 According to FDA regulations, one cannot state a claim that one's drug or biologic is superior to another unless there has been a head to head study demonstrating that superiority. That regulatory reality can be frustrating to communications professionals who market drugs. There may be times when a marketer might be tempted to try to sidestep that constraint, by making a claim of superiority regarding a new class of drugs, but without mentioning the specific drug or biologic product by name. This is especially tempting if the drug they are wanting to market is the only approved drug in its class.

    It doesn't work.

    The FDA will most certainly issue a warning letter whether or not the drug or biologic is mentioned by name if a claim of superiority is assigned to the class where there is only one approved product. They have done it in the past, and in this era when the agency is trying to shore up confidence in its ability to regulate the pharmaceutical industry, they most surely would do it again.

    Comments

    Interesting posting. You have referenced FDA Warning Letters and there is a site you might find interesting: http://www.compliancedoc.com/

    All of their content (FDA Warning Letters and Regulations) are searchable text!

    Post a comment

    If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In

    Subscribe / Email Me

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    Search

    • Google

      WWW
      eyeonfda.com

    December 2008

    Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4 5 6
    7 8 9 10 11 12 13
    14 15 16 17 18 19 20
    21 22 23 24 25 26 27
    28 29 30 31