Wyeth found guilty of paying to boost use of a specific medicine
http://www.100md.com
《英国医生杂志》
Drugs giant Wyeth has suspended a programme of offering to switch patients on GPs' lists from a version of a drug that is soon to lose its patent to one with a longer patent life, after a ruling by the pharmaceutical industry's regulatory body.
According to Des Spence, a GP in Glasgow, Wyeth started to offer GPs in his area a service to change the repeat prescriptions of patients taking the proton pump inhibitor Zoton (capsules of lansoprazole) to Zoton FasTab (orodispersible tablets of lansoprazole) about six months ago. The reason the company gave for the switch to FasTab was that the newer drug was 10% cheaper than Zoton and equally effective, so the switch represented a cost saving for practices.
Under the switching programme GPs were asked to sign a consent form that allowed an outsider, a "GP system specialist" sponsored by Wyeth, to search GPs' databases to identify patients taking Zoton and make the change of drug.
Dr Spence complained to the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry about the practice two months ago, claiming that the reason for the switch was highly misleading.
"Zoton is due to come off patent in the next few years. When this happens the NHS will benefit from generic prescribing. Branded Zoton FasTab will have 10 to 15 years of patent to run and is being promoted to maintain the company's market share," he claimed. "Lots of doctors are not aware of this activity, but it is nothing more than marketing."
The Prescription Medicines Code of Practice Authority, which administers the association's code of practice, ruled that Wyeth had breached two clauses of the code.
The first breach was paying a third party to change repeat prescriptions of patients on GPs' list from Zoton. "Companies could of course promote products on the basis of cost, and it was not unreasonable to note savings that a practice might make by switching from one product to another," the authority's ruling said.
"The difficulty was when the company paid directly or indirectly for those changes to be made because then the company's actions amounted to it paying to boost the prescription of a specific medicine. In the Panel's view it was immaterial that the two medicines at issue were marketed by the same company.
Dr Des Spence: the scheme is "nothing more than marketing"
"The provision of the service by Wyeth would benefit a practice by saving it the expense of carrying out the switch itself. The arrangements amounted to a pecuniary advantage given as an inducement to prescribe Zoton FasTab," concluded the authority.
Wyeth breached another clause of the code because "high standards had not been maintained," it ruled.
A spokesman for Wyeth said the company had accepted the panel's ruling regarding a breach of clauses 18.1 and 9.1 of the code of practice and had complied with the requirements of the undertaking given in relation to it. The company was found not to be in breach of two other clauses.
The company's statement said: "Clause 18.1 concerns no gift, benefit in kind or pecuniary advantage being offered or given to healthcare professionals as an inducement to prescribe. The supplementary information to this Clause does not prevent the provision of a medical service which will enhance patient care or benefit the NHS if such provision is not done in such a way as to be an inducement to prescribe.
"Wyeth is committed to working in partnership with healthcare professionals to help ensure that patients receive the most appropriate care, in line with the patient-centred focus of the NHS."(Zosia Kmietowicz)
According to Des Spence, a GP in Glasgow, Wyeth started to offer GPs in his area a service to change the repeat prescriptions of patients taking the proton pump inhibitor Zoton (capsules of lansoprazole) to Zoton FasTab (orodispersible tablets of lansoprazole) about six months ago. The reason the company gave for the switch to FasTab was that the newer drug was 10% cheaper than Zoton and equally effective, so the switch represented a cost saving for practices.
Under the switching programme GPs were asked to sign a consent form that allowed an outsider, a "GP system specialist" sponsored by Wyeth, to search GPs' databases to identify patients taking Zoton and make the change of drug.
Dr Spence complained to the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry about the practice two months ago, claiming that the reason for the switch was highly misleading.
"Zoton is due to come off patent in the next few years. When this happens the NHS will benefit from generic prescribing. Branded Zoton FasTab will have 10 to 15 years of patent to run and is being promoted to maintain the company's market share," he claimed. "Lots of doctors are not aware of this activity, but it is nothing more than marketing."
The Prescription Medicines Code of Practice Authority, which administers the association's code of practice, ruled that Wyeth had breached two clauses of the code.
The first breach was paying a third party to change repeat prescriptions of patients on GPs' list from Zoton. "Companies could of course promote products on the basis of cost, and it was not unreasonable to note savings that a practice might make by switching from one product to another," the authority's ruling said.
"The difficulty was when the company paid directly or indirectly for those changes to be made because then the company's actions amounted to it paying to boost the prescription of a specific medicine. In the Panel's view it was immaterial that the two medicines at issue were marketed by the same company.
Dr Des Spence: the scheme is "nothing more than marketing"
"The provision of the service by Wyeth would benefit a practice by saving it the expense of carrying out the switch itself. The arrangements amounted to a pecuniary advantage given as an inducement to prescribe Zoton FasTab," concluded the authority.
Wyeth breached another clause of the code because "high standards had not been maintained," it ruled.
A spokesman for Wyeth said the company had accepted the panel's ruling regarding a breach of clauses 18.1 and 9.1 of the code of practice and had complied with the requirements of the undertaking given in relation to it. The company was found not to be in breach of two other clauses.
The company's statement said: "Clause 18.1 concerns no gift, benefit in kind or pecuniary advantage being offered or given to healthcare professionals as an inducement to prescribe. The supplementary information to this Clause does not prevent the provision of a medical service which will enhance patient care or benefit the NHS if such provision is not done in such a way as to be an inducement to prescribe.
"Wyeth is committed to working in partnership with healthcare professionals to help ensure that patients receive the most appropriate care, in line with the patient-centred focus of the NHS."(Zosia Kmietowicz)