Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Pharmaceutical Industry Marketing and Influence Dean Haxby, Pharm.D. Associate Professor of Pharmacy Oregon State University, College of Pharmacy To receive.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Pharmaceutical Industry Marketing and Influence Dean Haxby, Pharm.D. Associate Professor of Pharmacy Oregon State University, College of Pharmacy To receive."— Presentation transcript:

1 Pharmaceutical Industry Marketing and Influence Dean Haxby, Pharm.D. Associate Professor of Pharmacy Oregon State University, College of Pharmacy To receive 1.5 AMA PRA Category 1 Credits™, you must review this progam and pass the CME quiz at the end. Release Date: January 2009 Expiration Date: January 2012

2 Attachments The attachments tab contains documents that supplement the presentation. The slides are available as an attachment to print out to use as a handout for the presentation. “Show Me the Evidence” has a list of additional resources on evidence-based drug information and industry marketing.

3 Program Funding This work was made possible by a grant from the state Attorney General Consumer and Prescriber Education Program which is funded by the multi-state settlement of consumer fraud claims regarding the marketing of the prescription drug Neurontin.

4 Continuing Education Sponsors Continuing Medical Education for the following activity titled “Pharmaceutical Industry Marketing and Influence”, is jointly sponsored by The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center and the Federation of State Medical Board’s Research and Education Foundation.

5 Program Speaker/Author: Dean Haxby, PharmD Course Director:Barbara S. Schneidman, MD, MPH Federation of State Medical Boards Research and Education Foundation, Secretary Federation of State Medical Boards, Interim President and Chief Executive Officer Program Directors:David Pass, MD Director, Health Resources Commission, Oregon Office for Health Policy and Research Dean Haxby, PharmD Associate Professor of Pharmacy Practice, Oregon State University College of Pharmacy Daniel Hartung, PharmD, MPH Assistant Professor of Pharmacy Practice, Oregon State University College of Pharmacy Target Audience: This educational activity is intended for health care professionals who are involved with medication prescribing. Educational Objectives: Upon completion of this activity, the participants should be able to: describe the purpose and expenditures for various marketing strategies and the impact on prescribing; outline techniques pharmaceutical representatives use to influence clinicians; identify strategies clinicians can use to reduce impact of marketing; describe the role of samples in marketing and the impact of samples on prescribing; identify drug sample regulatory requirements and options to improve sample use; summarize research findings on the impact of direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs; identify potential conflicts of interest. CME Information

6 CME Policies Accreditation: This activity has been planned and implemented in accordance with the Essential Areas & Policies of the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education through the joint sponsorship of The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center and the Federation of State Medical Boards Research and Education Foundation. The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center is accredited by the ACCME to provide continuing medical education for physicians. Credit Designation: The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center designates this educational activity for a maximum of 1.5 AMA PRA Category 1 Credits™. Physicians should only claim credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Conflict of Interest: It is the policy of UT Southwestern Medical Center that participants in CME activities should be made aware of any affiliation or financial interest that may affect the authors presentation. Each author has completed and signed a conflict of interest statement. The faculty members’ relationships will be disclosed in the course material. Discussion of Off-Label Use: Because this course is meant to educate physicians with what is currently in use and what may be available in the future, “off-label” use may be discussed. Authors have been requested to inform the audience when off-label use is discussed.

7 DISCLOSURE TO PARTICIPANTS It is the policy of the CME Office at The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center to ensure balance, independence, objectivity, and scientific rigor in all directly or jointly sponsored educational activities. Program directors and authors have completed and signed a conflict of interest statement disclosing a financial or other relationship with a commercial interest related directly or indirectly to the program. Information and opinion offered by the authors represent their viewpoints. Conclusions drawn by the audience should be derived from careful consideration of all available scientific information. Products may be discussed in treatment outside current approved labeling. FINANCIAL RELATIONSHIP DISCLOSURE Faculty Type of Relationship/Name of Commercial Interest(s) David Pass, M.D.None Dean Haxby, Pharm.DEmployment/CareOregon Daniel Hartung, Pharm.D., MPHNone Barbara S. Schneidman, MD, MPHNone

8 Learning Objectives 1.D escribe the purpose and expenditures for various marketing strategies and the impact on prescribing 2.Outline techniques pharmaceutical representatives use to influence clinicians 3.Identify strategies clinicians can use to reduce impact of marketing 4.Describe the role of samples in marketing and the impact of samples on prescribing 5.Identify drug sample regulatory requirements and options to improve sample use 6.Summarize research findings on the impact of direct-to- consumer advertising of prescription drugs 7.Identify potential conflicts of interest

9 Important Contributions by the Pharmaceutical Industry Development of new treatments that improve health and well-being Make substantial contributions to educational, health care and professional organizations Provide indigent care programs

10 Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Are for-profit companies Primary mission is to increase share holder value This is accomplished by: –developing new products –successfully marketing those products –having an effective lobby to protect and advance their interests

11 2007 Fortune 500 Profits J & J21% Pfizer37% Merck20% Abbott8% Wyeth21% BMS9% Eli Lilly17% Amgen21% Schering11%

12 Pharmaceutical Industry One of the most profitable industries in the US Industry advocates argue these profits are justified because: –Required to support R & D –Tremendous value of medications –High risk of the industry A report by Tufts University says it costs $802 million to bring a drug to market

13 Industry Critics Profits are excessive Drug development cost figures grossly inflated –exclude tax deductions/credits, include capital opportunity cost (1/2 of total), skewed sample of drugs, industry figures not verifiable Government funds much of critical research on new drugs Uninsured cannot afford medications Public Citizen

14 Pharmaceutical Industry Marketing A key to industry profitability Highly effective Very sophisticated Multi-pronged campaigns targeting clinicians and patients

15 Pharmaceutical Industry Promotion & Marketing Source: N Engl J Med 2007;357: Dollars

16 Annual Increase in US Prescription Drug & Total Health Expenditures Rx Drugs Health Annual % Change

17 Expenditures by Type of Marketing 2004 ($ Billions) IMSCAMTotalPercent Samples % Detailing % DTCA4447% MeetingsNo data223% E-promo.No data0.3 0% Journals0.5 1% UnmonitoredNo data % Total $57.5 Gagnon MA, Lexchin J. PLoS Medicine 2008;5:1-5

18 Pharmaceutical Representatives Still the major focus of pharmaceutical marketing Approximately 100,000 reps in 2005 vs 38,000 in rep per 6 MDs in US and 1 rep per 2.5 targeted MDs 6 million detail visits annually Cost estimate $12 - $13 thousand per MD on detailing (IMS data) PhRMA:”serves an essential function in the health care delivery system”

19 Characteristics of Representatives Presentability/appearance Outgoing personality Excellent interpersonnal skills Assertive

20 Representative Training How to be observant and assess clinician personalities How to adjust approach based on reactions and profile information How to gather and use personal information to establish a connection How to monitor impact of various marketing strategies on prescribing Plos Medicine 2007;4(4):

21 How Representative Can Tailor Approach Friendly clinician Skeptical clinician High prescribers Frame interactions as gesture of friendship Use literature, humility, appeal to their “high intellect” Make best effort to establish personal connection, best gifts Plos Medicine 2007;4(4):

22 How Representaive Can Tailor Approach Clinician prefers competing product Refuses to see reps Thought leaders Find out why, try to capture a niche Try to work through office staff, can get useful information Friendly thought leaders groomed for speaking circuit. Monitor impact of local talks and their allegience Plos Medicine 2007;4(4):

23 Targeted Clinicians High volume prescribers Specialists: scripts they initiate can continue for years by PCPs Opinion leaders Low volume, non-influential clinicians receive much less attention

24 Physician Rating of Rep Information Usefulness Kaiser Family Foundation Report March, 2002

25 Physician Rating of Accuracy of Representative Information Kaiser Family Foundation March, 2002

26 Stages of Rep/Provider Interactions Acknowledgement of relative status –Valuable time, opinion leader Find out what is known Outline benefits of product –Expert name drop Provider resistance Reinforcement of role –Compliments, sympathy Closure: ensure opportunity for return, gifts, obligation BMJ 2001;323:

27 Benefits to Provider Pleasant respite from workday demands Someone who is “impressed” with their “superior knowledge” Can be object of flattery and sympathy –Psychological benefits Receipt of gifts Can present themselves as skeptic –Questions information, doesn’t agree to prescribe Can feel like they were in control BMJ 2001;323:

28 Representative Goals Develop positive relationship Opportunity for future contact Create a sense of obligation Control agenda Promoting product appears secondary in many interactions

29 Influence on Prescribing Studies show that prescribing is influenced by industry representatives Higher cost, less rational prescribing is associated with: –Frequency of use of representatives as an information source –Perceived credibility of representative Even a few minutes of contact can impact prescribing Arch Fam Med 1996;5:237 Soc Sci Med 1988;26:1183

30 Perceived Influence of Pharmaceutical Reps Am J Med 2001;110:551

31 Physician/Drug Representative Meetings SpecialtyMeetings/Month Family Physicians16 Internal Medicine10 Cardiology 9 Pediatrics 8 Surgeons 4 Anesthesiology 2 N Engl J Med 2007;356:

32 Physician Industry Relationships Benefits% Reporting Samples78% Gifts83% Travel/CME funding35% Payments28% Any Relationship95% N Engl J Med 2007;356:

33 Physician Factors Associated With Receipt of Payments Practice with < 25% Medicaid/uninsured Private practice –Less likely in hospital/HMO setting University/Medical School Role as a preceptor Developer of clinical guidelines Cardiology specialty (of the six specialties studied) N Engl J Med 2007;356:

34 Physician Interactions With Detailers Physicians are aware of potential conflicts Interactions are welcomed Reps described as: –Pleasant –Friendly –Helpful J Gen Intern Med 2007;22:184-90

35 Methods to Deal With Potential Conflict of Interest Eliminate the conflict –Can be difficult and painful Rationalization –“Its educational” –“Patients need samples” Denial –“It doesn’t influence me” –“I take it with a grain of salt” J Gen Int Med 2007;22:184-90

36 Clinician Marketing Data One of best market research systems in the world Manufacturers have extensive data Collect information from pharmacies, PBM’s, AMA and Government Can track impact of different strategies Profiles help target efforts Ann Intern Med 2007;146:742-8

37 AMA Master File Has been sold to industry for decades Contains physician identifier data that can be linked to other prescribing data Generated 16% of AMA revenue in 2005 Due to member concerns, a new “opt out” option allows individual physicians to request that companies not share their individual data with representatives Most doctors do not know about the program and few have signed up (<1%) Ann Intern Med 2007;146:751-2

38 How to “Opt-out” Physicians can enroll by going to the following website: – Purchasers of the data must agree to restrict prescriber profiling by reps for those who have opted out Must be renewed every three years and manufacturers have 90 days to comply after requesting the opt-out Ann Intern Med 2007;146:742-48

39 Conclusions on Representative Marketing Industry invests billions on detailing Most prescribers meet with representatives Representatives are skilled at developing relationships with and influencing clinicians Meetings with representatives are associated with less rational prescribing and increased costs Most physicians feel they are not influenced

40 What Can Clinicians Do? Reduce or eliminate contact with industry representatives –“Just say no” Identify and use unbiased and independent sources of prescribing information –Medical letter, prescribers letter, cochrane data-base of systematic reviews, –See the document in attachments for sources of evidence-based drug information Opt-out to limit use of AMA master profile

41 Drug Samples A major marketing strategy An estimated $18 billion (retail value) distributed in 2005 Estimated use: 10-20% of patient encounters Primary industry goals : –Influence prescribing habits/get patients on med –Representative access, a reason to visit

42 Trends in Retail Value of Sample Distribution

43 Arguments for Samples A source of medications for the indigent Reduces cost to patient Provider can test effectiveness and tolerability before committing patient to long term use Prescribers can gain experience with a product

44 Arguments for Samples Can start therapy immediately A way around formulary or PA requirements Can assist with patient instruction Improves patient satisfaction Enhances patient-provider relationship / gift giving

45 Arguments Against Samples Loss of pharmacist review/counseling Clinician unfamiliarity may increase chance of medication errors Sub-optimal treatment choices may be made Labeling/documentation is often deficient Storage concerns –Environment –Security

46 Arguments Against Samples Estimated that only about half reach patients Ethical concerns with personal use by providers Only branded expensive drugs are sampled which increases overall cost of care Inconsistent supplies for indigent patients

47 Survey of Sample Use 12% of Americans received samples 13% of patients with insurance received samples 10% of the uninsured received samples 72% of sample users were above 200% of the federal poverty level 82% of sample users had health insurance the entire year while 18% were uninsured at least part of the year Am J Public Health 2008;98:284-9

48 Sample Use in Pediatrics 4.9% of children received samples in % of those receiving a prescription medication received samples 84% went to patients with insurance the whole year Over 500,000 children received drugs that were subsequently subject of serious safety concerns Pediatrics 2008;122:736-42

49 Samples Influence on Prescribing Randomized 29 Internal Medicine residents to a no sample and sample group No sample group was: –Less likely to use an advertised brand drug –Trend towards less expensive drugs Am J Med 2005;118:881-4

50 Samples Influence on Prescribing Studied 32 family medicine resident and faculty physicians prescribing for hypertension before and after a ban on samples Prescribing of first-line agents increased from 38% to 61% Impact was greatest on residents Fam Med 2002;34:729-31

51 Other Research on Sample Use In a physician survey of the effect of sample availability on prescribing, it was concluded that sample availability influences choice of drug and can lead to suboptimal drug selection (J Gen Int Med 2000;15:478-83) Samples are frequently used by clinicians or their family members; and by office staff: in one clinic the retail cost of samples taken was $10,000 (JAMA 1997;278:141-3)

52 Sample Impact on Cost and Continuation Patient out-of-pocket costs increased 47% (p<0.001) Total Rx costs increased 38% (p< ) The odds of continuing the same medication was dramatically lower after receipt of a sample than a prescription: OR, 0.22 (CI 0.08 – 0.65) Medical Care 2008;46:

53 Conclusions on Drug Samples Samples are a major marketing tool –Reps gain access Sample use can lead to higher costs for both patients and the health care system Sample use may compromise the quality of prescribing Samples are less likely to go to the uninsured

54 Prescription Drug Marketing Act (PDMA) Due to abuse, sample regulations were implemented in 1987 (PDMA) Applies to manufacturers Manufacturers must keep records of sample distribution Requires signed requests by prescribers Requires appropriate storage conditions

55 JCAHO Sample Requirements Applies to hospitals and health-systems Same standards as non-sample medications Written policies and procedures Proper, secure storage, regular inspections Labeled and dispensed like other meds Documentation same as other orders An effective recall mechanism

56 Strategies to Improve Sample Use Apply JCAHO requirements Develop sample formulary –Consider use of generic samples Clinics can ban samples –No Free Lunch has developed a patient education leaflet entitled “Why we don’t have free samples” –It is available for download free of charge at –Helps to support clinics that choose not to accept samples

57 Direct to Consumer (DTC) Advertising Advertising directly targeting consumers In 1997, the FDA relaxed regulations Eliminated requirement to list all side-effects –Allowed referral to another source of information such as a toll free number or website The US and New Zealand are the only developed countries to allow DTC advertising for Rx drugs

58 Trends in DTC Advertising

59 Type of DTC Advertising Print Advertising –Magazines –Newspapers Television Radio Internet

60 Vytorin (Merck/SP) $155 Million (2005) Nexium (AstraZeneca) $224 Million (2005) Source: Donohue JM. NEJM. 2007;357:673-81; *WSJ Oct 7, 2005; **WSJ Apr 16, 2004 Lunesta (Sepracor) $214 Million (2005) Coke Classic $146 Million (2004)* Bud Light $136 Million (2003)** Direct-to-Consumer Expenditures

61 PhRMA Position on DTC Ads Serves to improve public health –Prompts people to seek care –Promotes informed discussions –Provides useful information to consumers Improves compliance Physicians are in control, thus it won’t lead to inappropriate prescribing

62 Public Citizen Position on DTC Promotion not education Ads increase demand for newer more expensive products, thus increase costs Physician gate-keepers susceptible to marketing Can stimulate inappropriate use Can harm doctor-patient relationship FDA is grossly understaffed to regulate

63 Systematic Review of DTCA Patients who request a drug are 16x more likely to get it DTCA campaigns significantly increase trend of Rx volume of targeted drugs DTCA campaigns can increase new diagnoses Concern about risks of treating minor conditions To date no studies of patient satisfaction or health outcomes Qual Saf Health Care 2005;14:246-50

64 Kaiser Family Foundation Study 30% of adults have talked to their doctor as a result of seeing a drug ad 44% of these individuals were prescribed the drug they asked about Showed TV ads for Nexium, Lipitor and Singulair Kaiser Family Foundation November, 2001

65 Kaiser DTC Study Results Ads prompt patients to talk with their provider Those with greatest health needs most likely to take action –25% without condition would discus further Educational ability is mixed –Patients can identify condition, drug name, and need to see doctor; but most felt they knew little or nothing more about the condition or drug –Many subjects could not recall side effects or where to get additional information Kaiser Family Foundation November, 2001

66 Clinician Response to DTCA Based Medication Requests Survey of PCPs comparing clinician responses to a request for more information based on DTC ad vs. a reference book Requests based on DTC adds: –Were more likely to become annoyed –Less likely to answer questions –Less likely to provide written information Arch Intern Med 2003;163:

67 Survey Respondents Response to a Hypothetical Denied Request 46% thought they would be disappointed 25% would try to change prescribers mind 24% might try a different doctor 15% thought they would switch to a new doctor Health Affairs 2000;19(2):

68 Influence of Patient Requests on Antidepressant Prescribing 298 physician visits by standardized pts Patients presented with symptoms of two conditions: major depression, adjustment disorder Divided into three groups –Asked about Paxil –Asked about antidepressants in general –No mention of drug therapy JAMA 2005;293:

69 Influence of Patient Requests on Antidepressant Prescribing Major Depression %Rx % Rx Paxil –Asked about Paxil53%52% –Asked about antidep.76%3% –No med inquiry31%13% Adjustment Disorder –Asked about Paxil55%67% –Asked about antidep19%26% –No med inquiry5%0% JAMA 2005;293:

70 DTC Model Advertising increases awareness of condition and treatment Awareness motivates patients to seek care or treatment Requests lead to increased prescribing DTC essentially adds patients to the manufacturers sales force

71 Common Patient Misperceptions Many think DTC ads are reviewed and approved by the FDA before an add is released Some patients think DTC advertised drugs are completely safe and only highly effective agents are advertised

72 DTC Advertising Conclusions DTCA works to increase sales There is a substantial return on investment for manufacturers While DTCA can increase the rate of treatment, research shows there is potential for increases in both appropriate and inappropriate treatment Policies are needed to mitigate risks of DTCA in the US

73 Common Techniques Used in Ads Drug touted as unique, new or first Appeal to authority Bandwagon appeal Appeal to celebrity Appeal to fear

74 Slide Courtesy of

75 Disease Mongering Strategies to expand markets Promotional campaigns change the way people think about common ailments –Menopause becomes hormone deficiency –Shyness becomes social anxiety disorder –Acid indigestion becomes gastroesophageal reflux disease Lowering thresholds for treating common conditions The US has 5% of the worlds population yet accounts for 50% of drug consumption For an entertaining video that provides a hypothetical example, go to and search for motivational deficiency disorder. Click on a new Selling Sickness by Moynihan and Cassels

76 Regulation of Marketing FDA responsible for oversight, not Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Research suggests journal ads often do not meet all FDA requirements FDA does not have adequate staff FDA’s power is limited Impossible to regulate what reps say

77 Industry Sponsored CE Programs Industry invests heavily in educational programs as part of their overall marketing plan $2.4 billon spent on CME in 2006 –712,163 hours of education –61% supported by commercial sources It may be very difficult to critically evaluate information provided

78 Assessing Bias in Commercially Supported CME Disclosure: Required whether COI present or not Branding Ideally should present levels of evidence Favorable presentation of data, especially using low level evidence Watch out for verbiage suggesting weak evidence: “its possible”, “may be”, “in my experience” Unapproved use of products –Off-label drug use must be clearly identified

79 Questions to Ask Why am I attending? Are there better sources of information? Will I be able to critically evaluate this information?

80 Conclusions The primary mission of a pharmaceutical company is to generate profit and increase shareholder value Effective marketing helps companies achieve their mission Enormous amounts are expended in the marketing of prescription drugs, primarily for detailing, samples and DTCA Industry marketing is sophisticated, influential and impacts health professionals decision making

81 Conclusions Industry marketing can lead to sub-optimal prescribing Current marketing practices are controversial and opinions vary depending on ones perspective Clinicians can make choices to avoid undue influence Using unbiased and evidence-based sources of drug information and avoiding commercial sources as much as possible is an important step Consider signing up for the AMA opt-out program to prevent detailers from using your individual prescribing data at

82 Thank you This work was made possible by a grant from the state Attorney General Consumer and Prescriber Education Program which is funded by the multi-state settlement of consumer fraud claims regarding the marketing of the prescription drug Neurontin.

83 CME Instructions Please complete the survey, quiz and program evaluation questions. Click the finish button. Fill out the form and send ( /fax/mail) in to the address supplied to receive CME.


Download ppt "Pharmaceutical Industry Marketing and Influence Dean Haxby, Pharm.D. Associate Professor of Pharmacy Oregon State University, College of Pharmacy To receive."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google