Court Helps Define Off-label Promotion

Share
A Texas federal court decision helped define off-label promotion by giving two examples of activities that don’t count as promotion. Attorney Elizabeth Minerd (Reed Smith) writes in a Drug and Device Law blog post that while in recent years there have been numerous cases discussing the legal ramifications of promoting drugs or medical devices for off-label uses from many angles, the basic question of what constitutes off-label promotion has gone largely unanswered.

In United States ex rel. King v Solvay, she writes, whistleblowers claimed False Claims Act violations because it was “off-label promotion” for the company to (1) send dossiers of information to third-party payer formulary committees that included off-label information and (2) distribute a supplement of the American Journal of Managed Care reporting proceedings at a symposium where off-label information was discussed.

The court found that the dossiers of information were sent in response to the formulary committees’ request for “all available clinical data” for the drug. The court agreed with Solvay that the dossiers consisted of information that was compiled by doing literature searches and providing references that were not promotional in nature.

The company also argued that there was no evidence that it, rather than the journal publisher, distributed the journal supplement and said that its sales representatives had been cautioned not to use the supplement in any promotional manner. The court accepted that it was not known who distributed the supplement and that the sales reps had been put on notice that it could not be used to promote the drug.

Read more