Based on a recent legal case, he states,
“…a company pays a physician to provide an educational presentation to doctors, the manufacturer is subject to criminal prosecution if that physician affirmatively discusses the off-label use, but the same manufacturer will not be subject to prosecution if the physician provides the same information in response to an audience member’s unsolicited request.”
Free speech is apparently alive and well. We knew that unsolicited requests were a safe harbor for dissemination of off-label scientific information to physicians. This extends, at least in one court of law, the concept of unsolicited requests to oral requests during industry-sponsored physician-to-physician speaker programs.
It is however a tortuous path for pharmaceutical, medical device and diagnostics companies to navigate. As a basic review, be sure to abide by these “thou shalt nots” summarized on the WhistleblowersLaws website:
- Speakers programs where the choice of speaker is influenced by the marketing or sales department.
- Speakers programs where the choice of speaker is influenced by the speaker’s prescription writing habits.
- Selecting speakers absent any investigation of the speaker’s professional qualifications including ascertaining: a) whether the speaker has a bona-fide medical license, b) whether the speaker has published in the area, and c) whether the speaker is under investigation by any regulatory bodies or has been sanctioned, reprimanded, or suspended by any regulatory bodies.
- Grants to universities, doctors, or medical establishments for research or work where the marketing department of the company had an influence over the grant or funding.
- Pharma Petitions FDA for Binding Off-Label Rules (goodpromotionalpractices.com)