Domain Invest

  • Subscribe to our RSS feed.
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Digg

Wednesday, 9 January 2008

DTC User Fees Shot Down; Advertisers Face More Perilous Future

Posted on 12:59 by Unknown
Let’s hear it for the United States Congress. They aren’t too proud to change their minds—at least, not when it comes to tackling the question of how best to respond to those pesky TV commercials for prescription drugs.

In September, Congress enacted a new user fee program to fund pre-reviews of direct-to-consumer television ads, on the premise that both industry and society would benefit by ensuring that the Food & Drug Administration could offer constructive feedback on ads before they air.

The program, part of the FDA Amendments Act, set some tight timelines for FDA and industry to get the system up and running. Together, they got their acts together, crossed all the Ts and dotted the Is, and got the program up and running. FDA even began doing pre-reviews pursuant to the guidelines.

All for naught. In December, Congress changed its mind. In the omnibus appropriations bill signed the day after Christmas, Congress did not fund the new user fee program, and instead gave the agency $4 million in additional money from the Treasury to cover the cost of pre-reviews.

Since FDAAA sets a hard stop to the user fee program—FDA must collect the first round of fees before the end of January—there is now essentially no chance that the Pay TV program (as we liked to call it) will happen.

You have to feel bad for the industry and FDA negotiators who had to herd all the cats to hammer out the new user fee agreement.

Still, on paper at least, this turn of events is great news for advertisers. Rather than paying a fee of over $80,000 per commercial to get FDA’s feedback, they can get it for free. And, in theory at least, FDA can hire just as many new reviewers, but at the taxpayer’s cost—not industry’s. So the agency should be able to provide timeline and predictable responses as planned under Pay TV.

What’s not to like?

Quite a lot in fact. First, there is the thorny question of what happens next year and beyond. Unlike the user fee program, which was intended to run for five years and would have built a reserve fund to ensure stable funding for the ad review group, there is no guarantee that Congress will continue to provide additional funding to support the pre-review program.

That in turn may make it hard for FDA to follow through on its hiring plans. The agency doesn’t want to hire new reviewers this year only to have to lay them off in September when the current fiscal year ends. And even if FDA decides to take that chance, will they agency be able to recruit enough people willing to take a job that could turn out to be short term?

The agency has not decided yet how it will proceed, but promises it will explain its plans soon. (Our guess: FDA will wait until the FDAAA deadline to collect the fees—January 28—and then make the announcement as part of a formal withdrawal of the notices creating the new fees.)

Bear in mind that while pre-reviews are technically voluntary, we think advertisers would be very wise to use that process rather than risk facing the new enforcement actions Congress gave FDA under FDAAA.

Consider the dilemma advertisers will be in if FDA cannot or simply does not provide timely responses. Run an ad and risk a hefty fine? Or wait for an answer—and in effect surrender the right to advertiser that industry fought so hard to protect during the FDAAA debate.

The collapse of the user fee program doesn’t change two important facts for advertisers. First, FDA now has a much stronger hand in shaping TV ads—both in determining if products are advertised as well as what ads look like. (Subscribers to The RPM Report can read more here. Not a subscriber? Sign up for a free trial.)

More importantly, no matter what FDA does in 2008, you can bet that this issue is coming back in 2009. President Obama (didn’t I read yesterday that he had won?) or whomever takes over the White House will select a new FDA commissioner and you can bet DTC will remain a hot button issue.

The Energy & Commerce Committee offered a timely reminder of that fact by opening an investigation into Pfizer’s Lipitor commercials. Those commercials have been held up as examples of the new, more responsible approach industry is taking to DTC. (You have to ask yourself: has the committee seen Pfizer’s new “Viva Viagra” ad?)
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to XShare to Facebook
Posted in DTC Advertising, FDA, Lipitor | No comments
Newer Post Older Post Home

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Popular Posts

  • While You Were Settling
    Well, it was an interesting weekend: the writers' strike may have been settled, Obama swept (and won a Grammy), and there was an unusual...
  • EPO Relabeling: Its Not the Black Box, Its What FDA Says About the Black Box
    Whoever said actions speak louder than words hasn’t been paying attention to the regulatory response to drug safety issues involving the ane...
  • The Wacky World of Generics: Fosamax Edition
    Today, Merck bids a fond farewell to its Fosamax franchise, as the first generic versions enter the market. Three generic firms are enteri...
  • Higher Tax, Fewer Deals?
    The IN VIVO Blog has been somewhat mum on the carried interest debate. Frankly, this topic is being covered to death elsewhere (The link g...
  • CardioNet's Not So Big Surprise
    Riddle us this. When is news not news at all? When it’s involving CardioNet Inc.’s Friday filing for an IPO . See, this filing was essential...
  • While You Were Staying Put
    It's always sunny in ... London? Lets kick off the weekend wrap-up by highlighting a trio of stories from The Times about incoming Glax...
  • While You Were Almost Upsetting
    We've been told by certain football (soccer) fans that there are not enough allusions to the beautiful game in our weekend roundups. So ...
  • FDA’s Search for a Drug Chief Not Going Well: An Internal Candidate Emerges
    We know all of you have been passing the time following the Presidential Primaries when the race you’re really interested in is who the next...
  • While You Were Redesigning Your Blog
    Does our blog look big in this? You may have noticed a few changes round these parts, and we hope you like them. No, not that the pace of o...
  • The Downsizing Opportunity: Pipeline on the Cheap?
    The IN VIVO Blog was in Michigan last week, attending a profiting-from-downsizing symposium. Would Pfizer—we wondered at the Michigan Growth...

Categories

  • Abbott
  • activist shareholders
  • ADHD
  • advisory committees
  • alliances
  • Alnylam
  • Alzheimer's disease
  • Amgen
  • Andrew von Eschenbach
  • Andrew Witty
  • Astellas
  • AstraZeneca
  • Avandia
  • Avastin
  • Barack Obama
  • Barr
  • Bayer
  • Big Pharma
  • BIO
  • Biogen Idec
  • biologics
  • biosimilars
  • blogging
  • BMS
  • Boston Scientific
  • brand names
  • business development
  • business models
  • cancer vaccines
  • Carl Icahn
  • CBO
  • CDER
  • Celgene
  • Cephalon
  • China
  • clinical development
  • CMS
  • co-promotes
  • comparative effectiveness
  • conference
  • Congress
  • consumer genomics
  • corporate culture
  • corporate governance
  • corporate venture capital
  • CVS Caremark
  • Cytyc
  • David Kessler
  • deals of the week
  • debt financing
  • Diabetes
  • diagnostics
  • Dick Clark
  • drug approvals
  • drug delivery
  • drug discovery
  • drug eluting stents
  • Drug Pricing
  • drug safety
  • drug samples
  • DTC Advertising
  • e-health
  • Eisai
  • Elan
  • Eli Lilly
  • Emphasys
  • emphysema
  • Endo
  • epo
  • Euro-Biotech Forum
  • Exits
  • Exubera
  • FDA
  • FDA/CMS Summit
  • FDAAA
  • Film and TV
  • financing
  • FOBs
  • Forest Labs
  • Galvus
  • gene therapy
  • Genentech
  • General Electric
  • generics
  • Genzyme
  • Gleevec
  • Google
  • GSK
  • Guidant
  • haircuts
  • Happy Holidays
  • HCV
  • Headhunting
  • Health Care Reform
  • hedge funds
  • Henry Waxman
  • hGH
  • HHS
  • Hillary Clinton
  • Hologic
  • hostile takeovers
  • hypertension
  • ImClone
  • IMS Health
  • In vitro diagnostics
  • In3
  • India
  • insomnia
  • instrumentation
  • insulin
  • Inverness
  • IP
  • IPO
  • IPO pricing
  • Isis Pharmaceuticals
  • Israel
  • IT
  • JAMA
  • Januvia
  • Japan
  • John McCain
  • Johnson and Johnson
  • JP Morgan
  • LaMattina
  • lawsuits
  • layoffs
  • legislation
  • Life-Cycle Management
  • Lipitor
  • Lucentis
  • management succession
  • Mark McClellan
  • marketing
  • Martin Mackay
  • medical devices
  • Medicare
  • Medicare Part D
  • Medimmune
  • Medtech Insight
  • Medtronic
  • Merck
  • Merck-Serono
  • mergers and acquisitions
  • Michael McCaughan
  • Millennium
  • mmm beer
  • MRI
  • multiple sclerosis
  • music
  • nanotechnology
  • NEJM
  • new drug approvals
  • new funds
  • NICE
  • NicOx
  • NIH
  • Nobel Prize
  • Novartis
  • Novo Nordisk
  • Nycomed
  • off-label promotion
  • oncology
  • ophthalmology
  • Orthopedics
  • osteoporosis
  • OTC drugs
  • Out-Partnering
  • Oxycontin
  • pain
  • Part D
  • Patient Advocacy
  • PDUFA
  • personalized medicine
  • Pfizer
  • pharmacy benefits
  • PhRMA
  • politics
  • poll results
  • PR
  • prasugrel
  • Presidential Election
  • Press Release of the Week
  • Primary Care
  • private equity
  • Procter and Gamble
  • PSA
  • Purdue Pharma
  • rare diseases
  • reimbursement
  • research and development productivity
  • research and development strategies
  • reverse mergers
  • rimonabant
  • RiskMAP
  • RNAi
  • Roche
  • Roger Longman
  • royalties
  • sales forces
  • Sanofi-aventis
  • Schering-Plough
  • Science Matters
  • Sepracor
  • shameless self-promotion
  • share buybacks
  • Shire
  • Sirtris
  • Smith and Nephew
  • Solvay
  • SPACs
  • spec pharma
  • spin-outs
  • sports
  • Start-Up
  • statins
  • Steve Nissen
  • Stryker
  • Supreme Court
  • Takeda
  • Teva
  • Thanksgiving
  • The RPM Report
  • UCB
  • vaccines
  • Velcade
  • Ventana
  • venture capital
  • venture debt
  • Venture Round
  • Vertex
  • Vioxx
  • Vytorin
  • Wacky World of Generics
  • While You Were ...
  • Wyeth
  • Zetia
  • Zimmer
  • ZymoGenetics

Blog Archive

  • ▼  2008 (76)
    • ►  February (25)
    • ▼  January (51)
      • "Consensus is not our goal": A Conversation with F...
      • Neuro Companies Causing Headaches
      • Who's Sorry Now? Not Feeling So Good Edition
      • A Mission at Risk
      • Close But No Cigar
      • Survey Says?! Too Little, Too Late
      • The Muddy Waters of IVD
      • Big Biotech M&A: Waiting for the Casus belli
      • Icahn to Biogen: Take a Mulligan
      • While You Were Almost Upsetting
      • FDA Gets Out in Front on Vytorin, Defends LDL Endp...
      • Deals of the Week: Beyond Vytoringate
      • The Best Defense Is a Good Offense, Or Something L...
      • Listen for the Threat of the Medicare Rebate
      • J&J Tests FDA's Pain Threshold with Tapentadol
      • Cardiovascular Systems Antes Up
      • Vytorin: Two Sources of Angst for DTC
      • Teva Buys Cogenesys
      • Ventana Accepts $3.4 Billion
      • Aye for an Eye
      • Vytorin: In this Case, Best to Ignore History
      • While You Were Losing Your Resolve
      • Deals of the Week: You Can't Always Get What You Want
      • Whose Life is it Anyway?
      • Bio-Rad Salutes You
      • Private Equity Goes Public
      • The Big Winner in the Vytorin Debacle? It Might be...
      • Orion to Cover Both Sides of the Atlantic
      • The Man Pharma Loves to Hate
      • Nissen Weighs in on ENHANCE
      • Lesson from the JPMorgan Conference: Exceptions Th...
      • Novo Scraps Inhaled Insulin
      • At JP Morgan, Stryker's Big Smile
      • Public Confidence in Drug Safety: Solution is in "...
      • While You Were Staying Put
      • Deals of the Week: far from the Westin St. Francis
      • Amgen Braces for Another Review of EPO Safety: How...
      • Biotech’s Original Sin
      • The R&D Productivity Crisis: Is There a Bright Side?
      • DTC User Fees Shot Down; Advertisers Face More Per...
      • Iowans Fall for Obama, Will New Hampshireites?
      • “We’re a Buyer, not a Seller,” Says Genzyme With I...
      • The Stakes Increase on Comparative Effectiveness
      • While You Were Going to California
      • Regulatory Sausage Making
      • Deals of the Week: New Year's Resolutions
      • Another Dismal Year for New Drug Approvals
      • Addex Ups Dealmaking Ante
      • Congress Has Lump of Coal for FDA in Funding Bill
      • New Year's Resolution 2008: Create Infrastructure ...
      • The Top Ten IN VIVO Blog Posts of 2007
  • ►  2007 (329)
    • ►  December (32)
    • ►  November (42)
    • ►  October (37)
    • ►  September (33)
    • ►  August (29)
    • ►  July (39)
    • ►  June (39)
    • ►  May (43)
    • ►  April (16)
    • ►  March (13)
    • ►  February (5)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  2006 (8)
    • ►  December (3)
    • ►  November (5)
Powered by Blogger.

About Me

Unknown
View my complete profile