Healthy Skepticism Library item: 3675

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

Watts W.
Senators question research grants: Grassley: 'Educational' grants used for drug marketing
MarketWatch 2006 Jan 11
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/yhoo/story.asp?source=blq/yhoo&siteid=yhoo&dist=yhoo&guid=%7BC11F8C93%2D3FD4%2D4119%2DBBC5%2D71B607F8DD5D%7D

Notes:

Ralph Faggotter’s Comments:

This article provides some insight into the Machiavellian techniques used by the pharmaceutical industy to promote its products.

A particularly obnoxious concept is the idea of ‘key opinion leaders’.

‘Opinion leaders’ are basically ordinary medical doctors whose only claim to fame is that they cannot resist the schmoozing, the grooming and the financial incentives provided for them by the pharmaceutical companies which creates the illusion of elevating them to a plane of expertise above their colleagues (who often succumb to the illusion).

Full text:

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — Lawmakers on Wednesday said that a Senate probe of educational grants offered by drugmakers raises concerns that a sizable share of the money is being granted through marketing personnel to patient-advocacy groups and doctors that might advocate unapproved uses of prescription medications.

“It’s hard to see how you could call some of these grants ‘educational.’ Some groups have learned that their very survival depends on drug-company money. In that case, it seems pretty obvious that their independence may be compromised,” said Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, which has been investigating how the grants are applied.

Sen. Max Baucus of Montana, the panel’s senior Democrat, said that the grants should be awarded for “legitimate education activities and not marketing purposes.”

If drug companies “are crossing the line with these grants and influencing providers to make treatment decisions they might not otherwise make, that’s a problem and we’re going to tackle that,” he added.

The New York Times reported in its Wednesday edition that the committee found that 23 firms made $1.47 billion worth of educational grants 2004, up from $1.23 billion in 2003.

Doctors can prescribe approved drugs for any use they see fit, but drug firms can market drugs only for purposes approved by regulators.

The probe comes as lawmakers and other authorities reexamine methods used by drugmakers to encourage physicians to prescribe drugs for uses not approved by regulators, according to the Times.

Grassley and Baucus focused on the example of the heartburn drug Propulsid, manufactured by Johnson & Johnson . Some physicians and groups have advocated using the drug, which was never approved for pediatric use, to treat children for gastroesophageal-reflux disorder and colic.

The senators said that documents and information provided to the committee by Johnson & Johnson showed that the firm distributed hundreds of thousands of dollars in research and education grants related to Propulsid, including $150,000 to a pediatric gastroenterologist, who was an advocate for pediatric use of Propulsid.

In a letter to Johnson & Johnson Chief Executive William C. Weldon, the committee asked for further information on the grant process, and noted that a number of the firm’s sales and marketing personnel appeared to play a major role in approving educational grants.

Also, the committee noted that four individuals received more than $175,000 each in grants related to Propulsid. “It appears that by funding these specific individuals so extensively, your company was attempting to build ‘key opinion leaders,’ who influence their peers’ medical practice, including but not limited to prescribing behavior,” the lawmakers wrote.

The committee also sent letters this week to most other major drug companies seeking information on their use of educational grants.

A Johnson & Johnson spokesman said that the firm was “in receipt of the letter and we will cooperate with the committee’s request for more information.”

Healthy Skepticism Library item: 3675

Announcements