corner
Healthy Skepticism
Join us to help reduce harm from misleading health information.
Increase font size   Decrease font size   Print-friendly view   Print
Register Log in

Healthy Skepticism Library item: 15220

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

 

Publication type: news

Miller N.
Apology for misleading drug claims
WA Today (Western Australia) 2009 Mar 4
http://www.watoday.com.au/national/apology-for-misleading-drug-claims-20090304-8oii.html


Full text:

A BIG drug company has mailed an apology to all Australian doctors after being caught out making misleading claims about a controversial new anti-depressant.

Duloxetine, sold as Cymbalta, went on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme last July despite official warnings linking it to suicide and liver damage. It has been prescribed more than 82,000 times since, 23,000 in Victoria alone.

A Medicines Australia review has found that Eli Lilly made a “concerted effort” at the time of the PBS listing to spruik “off-label” use of the drug at up to twice the approved dose, as a treatment for physical pain associated with depression.

Companies are not legally allowed to promote drugs for off-label use when there is not enough clinical proof that the treatment works as advertised.

Eli Lilly has a recent track record of off-label promotion.

In January in the US, the company agreed to pay a $US1.42 billion settlement over its marketing of the anti-psychotic drug Zyprexa after pleading guilty to a federal misdemeanour.

The Medicines Australia review found the evidence of a pain relief effect would “enliven a debate in a medical setting”, but did not support the use of Cymbalta as a treatment for physical pain associated with depression. The company was fined $100,000 and ordered to withdraw all promotional material making the claims.

Eli Lilly’s appeal against the decision, saying the material was “educational” rather than promotional, was dismissed.

In a letter to doctors dated February 20, the company apologised for “any unintentional confusion” over the marketing of Cymbalta. It admitted the marketing material might have been misleading, and might have suggested using a higher than appropriate dose of the drug. The Age understands that the letter was prompted by further complaints to the company about its earlier promotion. Eli Lilly was unable to respond to further questions from The Age by deadline yesterday.

Cymbalta has been controversial since it was first approved for use in the US.

The FDA has warned that Cymbalta users “may be more likely to think about killing themselves or actually try to do so, especially when Cymbalta is first started or the dose is changed”.

It also warned that Cymbalta might cause liver damage, and users must not drink alcohol.

 

  Healthy Skepticism on RSS   Healthy Skepticism on Facebook   Healthy Skepticism on Twitter

Please
Click to Register

(read more)

then
Click to Log in
for free access to more features of this website.

Forgot your username or password?

You are invited to
apply for membership
of Healthy Skepticism,
if you support our aims.

Pay a subscription

Support our work with a donation

Buy Healthy Skepticism T Shirts


If there is something you don't like, please tell us. If you like our work, please tell others.

Email a Friend








Cases of wilful misrepresentation are a rarity in medical advertising. For every advertisement in which nonexistent doctors are called on to testify or deliberately irrelevant references are bunched up in [fine print], you will find a hundred or more whose greatest offenses are unquestioning enthusiasm and the skill to communicate it.

The best defence the physician can muster against this kind of advertising is a healthy skepticism and a willingness, not always apparent in the past, to do his homework. He must cultivate a flair for spotting the logical loophole, the invalid clinical trial, the unreliable or meaningless testimonial, the unneeded improvement and the unlikely claim. Above all, he must develop greater resistance to the lure of the fashionable and the new.
- Pierre R. Garai (advertising executive) 1963