Cheap Cialis Blogger | Search results for "coupon"

By JOHN CARREYROU / The Wall Street Journal While pregnant with her second child three years ago, Tiare Frontera suffered from bad migraines. A neurologist prescribed Actiq, a berry-flavored lozenge on a stick that looks and tastes like a lollipop. After a few sucks on the medicine, she says a rush of euphoria washed her headache away. Soon, Mrs. Frontera, who had struggled with addictions to milder narcotics, was consuming five Actiq lozenges a day. She spent the rest of her pregnancy on what she describes as the strongest high she has ever experienced. When she gave birth, her baby son was cranky and wouldn’t sleep. Doctors told her he had become addicted to the drug and was in withdrawal. Mrs. Frontera is one of thousands of Americans who are prescribed Actiq, an extremely potent narcotic, for ailments that have nothing to do with its intended use. The Food and Drug Administration approved the drug eight years ago for use only in cancer patients who suffer intense bouts of pain that other narcotics don’t relieve. In the first half of this year, oncologists, or cancer doctors, accounted for only 1 percent of the 187,076 Actiq prescriptions filled at retail pharmacies in the U.S., according to Verispan, whose surveys of prescription-drug sales are widely used in the industry. Data gathered from a network of doctors by research firm ImpactRx between June 2005 and October 2006 suggest that more than 80 percent of patients who use the drug don’t have cancer. Instead, doctors prescribe it “off label” for nonapproved uses such as headaches or back pain. Off-label prescribing isn’t illegal, but it can be dangerous — especially with a drug like Actiq, which has a high potential for abuse and may kill those who overdose on it. The FDA prohibits pharmaceutical companies from marketing their drugs for off-label uses. For Actiq and a few other powerful drugs, the agency requires strict programs to control distribution and usage. Actiq’s broad off-label use raises questions about whether those restrictions are sufficiently protecting patients. “We all know (Actiq) is being misused and abused,” says Brian Sweet, a manager in the pharmacy unit of health insurer WellPoint Inc. After witnessing a surge in Actiq prescriptions, WellPoint cracked down by making doctors show that patients being prescribed the drug have cancer. Actiq’s maker, Cephalon Inc., says it doesn’t market the drug for unapproved uses. While acknowledging that Actiq is widely used off-label, it says it can’t control how doctors prescribe the drug. Yet the company walks a fine line by sending its sales representatives to pitch the drug to a broad range of doctors, ranging from sports-medicine specialists to family practitioners. It gives these doctors coupons for free samples. Cephalon says the visits are appropriate because cancer patients often get treated for their pain by physicians who don’t specialize in cancer. Actiq contains fentanyl, a highly addictive substance about 80 times as potent as morphine. Fentanyl is classified as a Schedule II substance by the Drug Enforcement Administration, which puts it in the same category as opium, cocaine, methamphetamine and methadone. Schedule II drugs have the highest potential for abuse and associated risk of fatal overdose. Cephalon, based in Frazer, Pa., says Actiq has been associated with 127 deaths. Two of them involved children who confused the drug for candy. Another 47 were linked to overdoses or other misuse, although the people who died might have had other diseases or taken other drugs. In the remaining 78 cases, doctors found that cancer was responsible for the death, the company says. Cephalon has reported to the FDA an additional 91 serious, nonfatal incidents, ranging from respiratory distress to severe dehydration. The U.S. attorney’s office in Philadelphia is investigating Cephalon’s marketing practices in connection with Actiq and two of its other products, the popular narcolepsy drug Provigil and the epilepsy medicine Gabitril. No charges have been filed. Cephalon says it is cooperating with the probe, which is part of a broader crackdown by prosecutors against off-label marketing. In August, the Justice Department fined Schering-Plough Corp. $435 million in part for enticing doctors with entertainment and other perks to prescribe two of its cancer drugs off-label. Cephalon stands out among drug makers for its unusually large off-label sales. Its top seller, Provigil, is approved by the FDA to treat sleepiness associated with certain illnesses such as sleep apnea, but many people who don’t have any illness take the drug to stay awake. Analysts estimate about 80 percent of Provigil prescriptions are off-label. Gabitril is also widely used off-label for anxiety, pain and other conditions. Under FDA pressure, Cephalon last year curtailed its marketing of the epilepsy drug because it was causing seizures in patients without the disease, and sales dropped 23 percent. Founded in 1987 by a former DuPont Co. scientist named Frank Baldino Jr., Cephalon expects revenue to exceed $1.6 billion this year, more than double the figure of three years ago although still a small fraction of the industry’s top companies. Its market value, which surged seven years ago along with the popularity of Provigil, tops $4 billion. Dr. Baldino earned $2.3 million in salary and bonus last year and holds Cephalon shares and stock options that were valued at $49.6 million as of the end of last year. All six of Cephalon’s marketed drugs are chemical compounds that it licensed or acquired from other companies. Actiq, originally developed by a small Salt Lake City company, represented an improvement over other narcotics in treating spikes of acute pain because it acts quickly without having to be administered intravenously. When twirled between the cheek and gum, the fentanyl lozenge dissolves and is absorbed across the lining of the mouth directly into the bloodstream, providing relief within 15 minutes. Actiq had sales of $15 million in 2000, when Cephalon acquired it. By last year, sales had grown to $412 million, making it Cephalon’s No. 2 drug. In the first nine months of this year, sales jumped to $471 million. Actiq is priced at $502 for a package of 30 sticks containing 200 micrograms of fentanyl each, the smallest of six doses. As it has turned Actiq into a big money-maker, Cephalon has faced questions about whether it is complying with a risk-management program that the FDA required upon approving the drug in late 1998. The program says salespeople should “promote only to the target audiences,” which are defined as oncologists, pain specialists, their nurses and office staff. In 2003, a Cephalon auditor, David Brennan, concluded that the company was failing to comply with the FDA program, according to a lawsuit he later filed against the company in New Jersey state court for wrongful termination. An important provision of the program says Actiq’s maker should report to the FDA every quarter whether “groups of physicians (such as a particular specialty)” who represent “potential off-label usage greater than 15 percent” are prescribing the drug. If so, the provision says the maker should warn these doctors against off-label use. Mr. Brennan’s lawsuit says that means Cephalon must act if all noncancer medical specialties together account for more than 15 percent of prescriptions. Cephalon interprets the provision differently. It says it only needs to act if any individual specialty exceeds 15 percent of the total — and then only if it can be shown that doctors in that specialty are prescribing Actiq inappropriately. Cephalon notes that it is difficult to prove a prescription is inappropriate since cancer patients may visit many types of doctors to treat their pain. It believes the 15 percent clause has yet to be triggered. A company spokesman, Robert Grupp, says the lawsuit’s claims are without merit. The FDA declined to comment. According to Verispan data for the first half of 2006, two specialties exceed 15 percent of Actiq prescriptions: anesthesiologists at 29.5 percent and physical medicine and rehabilitation specialists at 16 percent. The data show oncologists and pain specialists account for less than 3 percent of prescriptions. Cephalon doesn’t dispute the data. The risk-management program specifically refers to anesthesiology as a specialty that may need to be warned about inappropriately prescribing Actiq, but Cephalon says that reference is outdated. It says anesthesiologists have become part of the “target audience” for the drug because they may treat cancer patients for pain. Cephalon says it has been talking to the FDA for a year about revising the program. After Mr. Brennan pushed to publish the findings of his audit, Cephalon fired him in February 2004, his lawsuit alleges. Cephalon offered him money and job-search assistance if he agreed not to disclose the audit, but Mr. Brennan refused, the suit says. Mr. Grupp declined to discuss Mr. Brennan’s dismissal but noted that he is “a former disgruntled employee.” Mr. Brennan has been interviewed twice by investigators working for the U.S. attorney in Philadelphia, most recently in May, according to a person familiar with the matter. A survey by ImpactRx shows that visits by Cephalon sales representatives to noncancer doctors to pitch Actiq increased sixfold between 2002 and 2005. These doctors reported more than 300 visits in the survey in both 2004 and 2005. Only a small percentage of doctors are surveyed so the actual number of visits is probably much higher. Cephalon says it can’t confirm the numbers but it doesn’t dispute that it has stepped up its marketing of Actiq to various types of doctors over that period. Stephen Leighton, a general practitioner in Winston-Salem, N.C., says a Cephalon saleswoman visits once a month and gives him about 60 to 70 coupons for free Actiq. Patients can trade each coupon for six Actiq sticks. Dr. Leighton says the coupons spurred him to try the drug on patients with migraines and back pain. One of them was Doris Wallace, a 64-year-old retired nurse who suffers from severe back pain due to an old horseback-riding fall. Ms. Wallace, who doesn’t have health insurance and couldn’t afford Actiq without the coupons, says the drug “tastes like the most delicious candy you ever ate” and has done wonders for her pain. At the height of her use, she was consuming 24 Actiq sticks a month. The positive experience of patients like Ms. Wallace has led Dr. Leighton to prescribe Actiq more widely for different types of pain. Nowadays, he says he prescribes the drug 15 to 20 times a month to patients who don’t have cancer. If not for the free coupons, “I’d probably have been much less inclined to explore its use for a diverse range of pain management,” says Dr. Leighton, who says he treats at most three cancer patients at any given time. Dr. Leighton says he thinks the FDA-approved usage of Actiq is too narrow. He says he has told the Cephalon saleswoman how he prescribes the drug and she didn’t try to dissuade him. Mr. Grupp of Cephalon says Dr. Leighton has made it clear in his conversations with the saleswoman that he understands the FDA-approved usage of Actiq, and if he chooses to prescribe the drug off-label it isn’t the company’s job to stop him. Mr. Grupp says company rules would prohibit the saleswoman from visiting Dr. Leighton only if he never prescribed the drug for cancer pain. “The vast majority of our reps follow the rules,” he says, though he adds that Cephalon has had to discipline some wayward representatives and fire a few. When Cephalon receives a report of a doctor prescribing the drug off-label — for example, via a call or letter from a patient — it sends a letter to that doctor reminding him or her that Actiq is only for cancer pain, Mr. Grupp says. The company has sent more than 3,300 such letters, he says. Earlier this year, Dr. Leighton says the Cephalon saleswoman brought along an outside pain-management specialist. Over lunch, Dr. Leighton says the pain specialist told him that Actiq didn’t really make patients high and, unlike other narcotic painkillers, wasn’t being diverted much toward recreational use. Cephalon declined to comment on the conversation. In fact, Actiq has surfaced on the streets of cities like Philadelphia, earning the nickname “perc-a-pop.” Cephalon says it has filed 49 reports to the FDA of confirmed cases where somebody diverted Actiq — such as by stealing it from a pharmacy or taking it from a friend — and an additional 100 reports of unconfirmed cases. Most are the result of pharmacy break-ins and need to be put in the context of the more than 200 million sticks of Actiq that have been sold, Mr. Grupp says. Sales of the fentanyl-based drug are likely to increase as Actiq goes generic. In late September, Barr Pharmaceuticals Inc. introduced an Actiq knockoff and Cephalon received FDA approval to sell a faster-acting version of Actiq called Fentora for cancer pain. Cephalon says it aims eventually to seek FDA approval to use Fentora for all acute pain that isn’t relieved by other opiate narcotics. Mrs. Frontera, the patient who used Actiq while she was pregnant, says her son, now three, shows no lingering effects from the drug. Mrs. Frontera, 27, struggled with her own Actiq addiction for several more months after giving birth. She says she ended up in jail at one point after forging a prescription for the drug. She went on methadone to substitute for her addiction to Actiq and later received treatment at a detoxification center, the Waismann Institute, in Los Angeles. Now she lives in San Luis Obispo, Calif. “It makes me angry that it was prescribed to me,” she says of Actiq. “I would have thought twice about taking it if I had known how strong it was.” Philip Delio, the neurologist who prescribed Actiq to Mrs. Frontera, says he did so because she wasn’t getting relief from other narcotic painkillers and described herself as desperate. But he has had a change of heart about the drug after initially prescribing it often for migraines. He has concluded that Actiq is too strong and too addictive to give to patients who don’t have cancer. Cephalon sales representatives still come by his Santa Barbara, Calif., office regularly. But Dr. Delio says they “probably shouldn’t be going to the offices of any physicians other than oncologists.” Sphere: Related Content Cheap Generic Viagra

Tags: actiq, drug, cephalon, pain, doctor

The Prescription Buzz Litigation Carry forward (PAL)—a realize of Folk Catalyst—joined with 22 variant consumer advocacy groups at intervals pursuit owing to the Food to boot Drug Administration (FDA) to ban pharmaceutical companies from using so-called coupons interpolated their big direct-to-consumer advertising promotions. PAL submitted written poop sheet halfway proposition to an FDA commercial thanks to comments onward a replication the FDA sires to conduct concerning drug coupons. Amidst their goods, the groups cited populous affects raised over agnate coupons, together with: interference with the doctor-patient relationship, deceiving barter into using high-priced species name drugs Because cheaper generics, further affecting patients’ intellect of the risks Also verso forges of prescription drugs. “Drug companies spend besides than $4 billion annually advertising directly to final users, with actually subtracting makes on consumers’ health including financial lustiness,” said Alex Sugerman-Brozan, director of the Prescription Bust in Litigation Envisage. “Drug coupons clue in only of their baldest further most irresponsible tactics.” “Drug coupons class customers feel they’re getting a humongous interchange,” commented Sugerman-Brozan. “Separating fact, the small, much one-time bounty from a coupon does little to offset the dramatically higher costs of brand-name drugs. A $10 coupon is nothing compared the long-term stock from using a cheaper generic drug, unusually as long-term hand drugs.” “ Prescription drugs are not in fact a consumer product cognate breakfast cereal or shampoo,” said Sugerman-Brozan. “But using coupons to hit on drugs treats them steady they are. Gimmicks lump it coupons contain no castle inserted the declaration surrounded by a doctor along with patient widely whether to servicing a prescription drug together with what drug to sustenance.” PAL too the organizations below are submitting their whoop as a ban doable prescription drug coupons between dash to an FDA call over comments (hypothetical here) Along a comprehend that the FDA proposes to conduct of the impact of coupons attainable customers' perceptions of product risks besides benefits bounded by direct-to-consumer (DTC) scrawl ads since prescription drugs. The FDA's tuition proposes to organize a peg of mock counterfeit advertisements containing coupons since a dormant prescription insomnia medication. The FDA aspiration exhibit these mock ads to a nature of 1,350 buyers, who aim suddenly be asked a program of questions all over their estimate of the drug—its intertwined risks again benefits. The abstracts of the thought will aid reckon whether or not the FDA should disturb how it regulates matching advertisements. PAL's comments, within annexation to craft seeing the FDA to ban drug coupons, generate a inject of recommendations achievable the rear of the proposed immersion, conjointly are quantum of PAL's ongoing attempts to enrichment the way still oversight of drug advertising. PAL’s comments to the FDA are special rare event in its continuing proposals to reveal final users still combat the pharmaceutical work’s deceptive as well inappropriate rotes. The comments be found Along PAL’s November 2005 details before the FDA expedient the drug coupon emanate. Along Wednesday 26 April at 2 p.m. Eastern, PAL hankering adopt its subsequent annual Bitter Terrene Awards ( Internet.bitterpillawards.org ). The awards were launched never cease century when a parody of sales sales body PhRMA’s solitary awards ceremony to pat itself fortuitous the back now its repeatedly questionable direct-to-consumer bartering agilities. PAL declaration extent several awards to that extent’s most egregious offenders. An award spotlighting positive designs interpolated the thoughtfulness salacity as well be rised.

Tags: drug, coupon, fda, pal, prescription

Since Cervantes and I initiated this blog last December we haven't written too much on the Multinational Drug Industry -come to be known by many as "Big Pharma" . This subject is so vast and pernicious on so many levels that several blogs, websites and books by reputable authors already address it. Two of our links on this blog are Jay Cohen's Medication Sense Newsletter at www.medicationsense.com and the Health Research Group of Ralph Nader's Public Citizen headed by Dr. Sidney Wolfe. Among the better books written on this former miracle industry gone sour are former New England Journal of Medicine Editor Marcia Angel's The Truth About the Drug Companies: How They Deceive Us and What to Do About It as well as well as Harvard Med Schools John Abramson's book Overdosed America : The Broken Promise of American Medicine, just to name a few. Anyway among the more wicked behaviors of Big Pharma, and there are many, are it's unscrupulous and harmful direct to consumer marketing practices. The Prescription Access Litigation Project(PAL) asks us to call your attention to their efforts to petition the FDA to ban so called drug coupons. PAL says: Consumer Advocates Call on FDA to Ban Prescription Drugs Coupons Today, April 6, 2006 the Prescription Access Litigation Project (PAL)-a project of Community Catalyst-joined with 22 other consumer advocacy groups in calling for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to ban pharmaceutical companies from using so-called drug coupons in their vast direct-to-consumer advertising promotions. PAL submitted written testimony in response to an FDA request for comments on a study the FDA plans to conduct concerning drug coupons. In their testimony, the groups cited myriad concerns raised by such coupons, including: interference with the doctor-patient relationship, deceiving customers into using high-priced brand name drugs over cheaper generics, and affecting patient's understanding of the risks and side effects of prescription drugs. "Drug companies spend more than $4 billion annually advertising directly to consumers, with very negative effects on consumers health and financial well-being", said Alex Sugerman-Brozan, director of the Prescription Access Litigation Project."Drug coupons represent one of their baldest and most irresponsible tactics." Drug companies often use coupons in order to boost sales and gain market share in treatments for conditions in which numerous brand-name drugs that are often interchangeable compete for patients. Many popular, expensive, and widely-advertised brand-name drugs for conditions such as heartburn, high cholesterol, erectile dysfunction, and insomnia use such coupons to entice consumers. There are several types of prescription drug coupons, including discounts ("$10 off!"). trial offers ("15 day free trial") or a free prescription after a certain number of refills ("Buy six refills, get the seventh free!"). Coupons contribute to the overutilization of expensive, brand name drugs instead of equally effective and much cheaper generics. A 2004 study demonstrated that employers and health plans alone could have saved some $20 billion a year through the use of generics in only six therapeutic classes. "Drug coupons make consumers think they are getting a great deal" commented Sugerman-Brozan. "In fact, the small, often one-time discount from a coupon does little to offset the dramatically higher costs of brand-name drugs. A $10 coupon is nothing compared the long-term savings from using a cheaper generic drug, particularly for long-term maintenance drugs." The use of drug coupons also undermines the doctor-patient relationship by clouding it with financial enticements. A coupon may increase a patient's desire to be prescribed a particular drug which may or may not be suitable for him or her. Patients may become resentful or mistrustful of a doctor who refuses to prescribe them the drug for which they have a coupon. "Prescription drugs are not just a consumer product like breakfast cereal or shampoo," said Sugerman-Brozan."But using coupons to sell drugs treats them like they are. Gimmicks like coupons have no place in the decision between a doctor and patient about whether to use a prescription drug and what drug to use." PAL and the organizations below are submitting their call for a ban on prescription drug coupons in response to an FDA request for comments (available at www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dockets/06n0029/06n-0029-n000001.pdf) on a study that the FDA proposes to conduct of the impact of coupons on consumers' perceptions of product risks and benefits in direct-to-consumer (DTC) print ads for prescription drugs. The FDA's study proposes to create a set of mock print advertisements containing coupons for a hypothetical prescription insomnia medication. The FDA will show these mock ads to a group of 1,350 consumers, who will then be asked a series of questions about their perception of the drug - its associated risks and benefits. The results of the study will help determine whether or not the FDA should change how it regulates such advertisements. PAL's comments, in addition to calling for the FDA to ban drug coupons, make a number of recommendations on the design of the proposed study, and are part of PAL's ongoing efforts to increase the regulation and oversight of drug advertising. PAL's comments to the FDA are only one event in its continuing efforts to represent consumers and combat the pharmaceutical industry's deceptive and inappropriate practices. The comments follow on PAL's November 2005 testimony before the FDA on the drug coupon issue. On Wednesday 26 April at 2 p.m. Eastern, PAL will present its second annual Bitter Pill Awards . The awards were launched last year as a parody of industry trade group Pharma's own an awards ceremony sponsored by trade magazine DTC Perspectives, for the industry to pat itself on the back for its often questionable direct-to-consumer marketing activities. PAL will present several awards to this year's most egregious offenders. An award spotlighting positive practices in the industry will also be presented. PAL is joined in its call for a ban on Rx drug coupons by:

Tags: drug, coupon, fda, consumer, pal

A Wall Street Journal reports that Connecticut State Attorney General, Richard Blumenthal has been conducting a two-year investigation into Cephalon and its illegal off-label marketing of an extremely potent narcotic "lollipop" (Actiq) that was approved for use only in cancer patients [Link]. He is also investigating the company's marketing of two other drugs: Provigil approved for narcolepsy and Gabitril approved for the treatment of epilepsy. "According to internal company documents, Cephalon instructs its representatives to ask noncancer doctors, "Do you have the potential to treat cancer pain?" Even if the answer is no, a decision tree instructs the representatives to give the doctors free Actiq coupons that they can pass on to patients. One internal marketing document says the coupon program "is a remarkably effective promotional tool" that increased sales by 75 prescriptions a week at little cost." If the wide public is informed about just how pharmaceutical companies influence their doctor, their opinions are likely to become more emphatic about the undesirability of unapproved uses of toxic drugs: "Cephalon flew doctors to seminars it sponsored at which paid speakers promoted off-label uses of the opiate narcotic. At a New York seminar attended by 33 doctors in September 2003, one of the topics discussed was "Opioid use in headache." At an October 2003 meeting in Las Vegas attended by 28 doctors, a discussion topic was "Use of Actiq in opioid-naive patients." Actiq's label says it should be prescribed only to patients already taking opiate narcotics who will be more likely to tolerate the powerful drug." "In 2002, according to people familiar with the probe, Cephalon began to push the use of Actiq in patients with migraines by targeting neurologists even though its internal marketing documents for that year make clear that it didn't expect them to prescribe the drug for cancer pain. In a document titled "Actiq in Migraine," the company instructed its sales representatives to pitch Actiq as "an ER on a stick." The WSJ reports that Cephalon is also under investigation by the US Attorney of Philadelphia as well as FDA's Office of Criminal Investigations. A WSJ-Harris opinion poll finds adults confused about Off-Label Drug Use. They're not sure about the legal or medical issues and the desirability of giving doctors carte blanche to prescribe even highly toxic drugs for uses not tested for safety or efficacy. The poll compares the results with an earlier poll conducted in 2004. The tables do not transcribe well in e-mail format. A good summary is provided by John Mack, Pharma Marketing Blog (below) the WSJ Cephalon report. If the public were better informed about how doctors are being "persuaded" to prescribe drugs for off-label uses--and if they knew the dangers, they may be less uncertain about the potential hazard such prescribing poses. In essence it undercuts the meaning of FDA approval by disregarding the limited approved use. [Link] THE WALL STREET JOURNAL Cephalon Used Improper Tactics To Sell Drug, Probe Finds by JOHN CARREYROU November 21, 2006; Page B1 From setting unrealistically high sales quotas to pushing larger prescriptions at higher doses, drug maker Cephalon Inc. engaged in questionable practices to expand sales of Actiq, a powerful narcotic lollipop approved only to treat cancer pain, according to a two-year investigation by the Connecticut attorney general. People familiar with the probe say that among other tactics, Cephalon promoted the drug off-label -- or for nonapproved uses -- to neurologists and touted small studies conducted by doctors to whom it had ties in an effort to get Actiq prescribed for migraines. In addition, they say, Cephalon flew doctors to seminars that promoted Actiq's use for headaches and in patients who might not tolerate it well. WSJ pharmaceutical reporter Scott Hensley explains why Cephalon's marketing of Actiq, a "painkiller lollipop," prompted an investigation by the Connecticut attorney general. Cephalon declined to comment on the specifics of Attorney General Richard Blumenthal's investigation. Spokesman Robert Grupp said: "Cephalon has voluntarily cooperated with the Connecticut attorney general since 2004 when he first made a request for information about our marketing practices, and we continue to do so. Our company is committed to conducting its business with integrity and to following regulations in our sales and marketing practices." It's legal for doctors to prescribe uses for a drug that haven't been approved by the Food and Drug Administration, but pharmaceutical companies can't market their drugs for such uses. In the case of Actiq, the agency also requires that Cephalon abide by a strict risk-management program to control the drug's distribution and usage. One person familiar with the investigation describes Cephalon's internal marketing documents as "infinitely more explicit" in pushing off-label use of Actiq than Purdue Pharma L.P. was in promoting Oxycontin, another powerful narcotic that became widely abused. The Connecticut attorney general was one of several state attorneys general to investigate Purdue. Mr. Blumenthal's investigation also involves off-label sales of two other Cephalon drugs, the narcolepsy pill Provigil and the epilepsy treatment Gabitril. Cephalon is also being investigated by the U.S. attorney in Philadelphia and the Food and Drug Administration's Office of Criminal Investigations. Like Mr. Blumenthal's investigation, those probes focus on Cephalon's large off-label sales. The U.S. attorney and the FDA declined to comment. Mr. Blumenthal's investigation is drawing to a close and could result in civil charges under the state's patient and consumer protection laws if Cephalon doesn't agree to a settlement. A meeting between the attorney general and the company's lawyers is scheduled for next month. If Cephalon opts to settle the case out of court, Mr. Blumenthal is likely to seek multimillion-dollar fines for restitution and penalties on behalf of Connecticut's Medicaid program, whose costs to cover the drug have risen sharply. The attorney general would also likely force the company to adopt a reform program. "We want them to change the way they do business," Mr. Blumenthal says. Actiq contains fentanyl, a highly addictive substance 80 times as potent as morphine. Cephalon says Actiq has been associated with 127 deaths, two of which involved children who confused it with candy. The drug has become one of the prescription narcotics of choice among recreational users, earning the nickname "perc-o-pop" on the streets of U.S. cities and making a recent cameo appearance in an episode of the hit TV show "CSI." In the first nine months of this year, Actiq sales reached $471 million. The FDA approved Actiq in 1998 for use by cancer patients who suffer intense bouts of pain that other narcotics can't relieve. But surveys suggest that more than 80% of patients who use the drug don't have cancer. The trigger for Mr. Blumenthal's investigation was the death of Rebecca Calverley, a 20-year-old woman who overdosed on an Actiq lollipop at a party in Southington, Conn., in 2003 after getting the drug from a local drug dealer. Mr. Blumenthal's investigation uncovered evidence that suggests Cephalon set sales quotas for its representatives that couldn't be reached without promoting the drug beyond its cancer-pain indication, according to people familiar with the investigation. Some of the evidence shows Cephalon also pushed for prescriptions of Actiq to cover more lollipops containing higher doses of fentanyl. Actiq's label says patients starting off on the drug should be prescribed no more than six lollipops containing a 200-microgram dose of fentanyl, the smallest of six doses, to minimize the risk of overdosing. Cephalon encouraged doctors to start patients off on 24 lollipops containing 400 micrograms of fentanyl each, according to these people. The higher dose costs more and brings in more revenue. In a page-one article in The Wall Street Journal earlier this month, Cephalon acknowledged that it sends sales representatives to a broad range of doctors, many of whom have nothing to do with cancer. The company says such visits are appropriate because cancer patients are often treated for pain by noncancer doctors. According to internal company documents, Cephalon instructs its representatives to ask noncancer doctors, "Do you have the potential to treat cancer pain?" Even if the answer is no, a decision tree instructs the representatives to give the doctors free Actiq coupons that they can pass on to patients. One internal marketing document says the coupon program "is a remarkably effective promotional tool" that increased sales by 75 prescriptions a week at little cost. Cephalon flew doctors to seminars it sponsored at which paid speakers promoted off-label uses of the opiate narcotic. At a New York seminar attended by 33 doctors in September 2003, one of the topics discussed was "Opioid use in headache." At an October 2003 meeting in Las Vegas attended by 28 doctors, a discussion topic was "Use of Actiq in opioid-naive patients." Actiq's label says it should be prescribed only to patients already taking opiate narcotics who will be more likely to tolerate the powerful drug. Mr. Grupp declined to comment on the seminars. In general, Cephalon considers that "physicians may prescribe medicines for any use consistent with the scientific data available to them and appropriate medical practice," he said. "The decision to prescribe 'off label' is theirs and theirs alone." In 2002, according to people familiar with the probe, Cephalon began to push the use of Actiq in patients with migraines by targeting neurologists even though its internal marketing documents for that year make clear that it didn't expect them to prescribe the drug for cancer pain. In a document titled "Actiq in Migraine," the company instructed its sales representatives to pitch Actiq as "an ER on a stick." Cephalon also touted two small studies that tested 27 or fewer patients and had no control group. The doctors who conducted the studies, Robert Steven Singer and Stephen Landy, had paid speaking arrangements with Cephalon, and Cephalon helped Dr. Landy with the study he conducted, according to the people close to Mr. Blumenthal's probe. Dr. Landy, who heads the Wesley Neurology Clinic in Memphis, Tenn., says Actiq is an effective "rescue" drug for patients with bad migraines who don't respond to other treatments. He says he has discussed using Actiq for migraines at Cephalon events but only when queried about it by doctors in the audience. Dr. Landy won't say how much Cephalon paid him for speaking. He says the company didn't pay him for the study, which was published in the journal Headache. Dr. Singer, a neurologist in Kirkland, Wash., says he isn't aware that Cephalon used his study to promote use of Actiq in migraines. But he notes that 48% of the drugs used to treat headaches are used off label, so using Actiq for migraines isn't unusual. He declines to say how much Cephalon paid him to speak. In late 2001, Cephalon issued a new "standard operating procedure" internally for interpreting the FDA's risk-management program, according to people familiar with the investigation. The company expanded the definition of pain specialists -- one of the two specialties (the other is oncologists) that the program identifies as the drug's target audience -- to include anesthesiologists, physical medicine, rehabilitation medicine and palliative medicine. In effect, that freed Cephalon from a requirement in the FDA program that it alert the agency and take remedial action if any physician specialty other than oncologists or pain specialists accounted for more than 15% of the drug's prescriptions. Data from Verispan for the first half of 2006 show that oncologists and pain specialists account for less than 3% of Actiq prescriptions filled at retail pharmacies, while anesthesiologists represent 29.5% of prescriptions. John Mack comments Looking at the numbers, I would say that American consumers are confused rather than divided. Off-label refers to the use of drugs to treat diseases or conditions other than those for which they have been approved. Off-label prescribing is legal in the U.S. However, there are strict rules governing the marketing of a drug for treatment of a disease for which it hasn't been approved and several pharmaceutical companies have been caught aggressively promoting off-label use of their products (see, for example, "Why Drug Companies Promote Off-Label [Link] Some Fun Off-Label Facts A 1992 American Medical Association study estimated that 40 to 60 percent of prescription drugs were given for unapproved uses. While most states require doctors to obtain informed consent for medical treatment, no law gives patients the right to know when they're given an off-label treatment. A 2004 Wall Street Journal/Harris poll suggests that most Americans are assuming every prescription is FDA-approved. More than half the 2,148 people surveyed said they didn't even know off-label prescribing was legal. Another 17 percent weren't sure. Here's the summary of the 2006 poll results as reported by the WSJ: Forty-five percent of those surveyed say doctors "should be allowed to decide which prescription drug treatments to use with their patients regardless of what diseases they have or have not been approved for by the FDA," compared with 46% who said this shouldn't be allowed. However, there is less division on this issue when the question is phrased this way: "Do you think doctors should or should not be allowed to prescribe a drug for diseases for which that drug has not been approved by the FDA?" In this case, only 27% answered "Should be allowed" vs. 48% who answered "Should not be allowed." I'm confused. Is it 45% or 27% who agree that off-label prescribing is OK? Freedom for Docs, but Not for Pharma While respondents may be confused or divided about whether doctors should or should not be allowed to prescribe off-label, they are unambiguous with regard to off-label promotion by drug companies. First amendment or no, they are agin' it! Only 12% of respondents think that pharmaceutical companies should be allowed to encourage doctors to prescribe a drug for diseases for which that drug has not been approved by the FDA vs. 69% who say no way! Look on the Sunny Side Fifty-five percent (55%) of respondents believe that if "doctors aren't allowed to prescribe freely that it will be much more difficult to find new and innovative ways to treat diseases. Thirty-five percent (35%) disagree." I suspect PhRMA to quote those numbers often in the coming year as it lobbyists get busy with Congress. (I don't think they'll talk much about the 12% or 27% numbers, though.) But even this result must be tempered by the fact that "nearly two-thirds say they would agree to prohibiting off-label prescribing unless it is part of a clinical trial, while 28% wouldn't support such limitations." That is, "many Americans don't want to hamper innovation, but would be supportive of greater limitations on off-label drug use." Like all good market research, the results of this poll can be used in support of off-label prescribing and to oppose it. Just cherry pick the results you wish to quote and Bob's your uncle! Labels: Drug Safety [Link] Legal/Regulatory [Link] Physician Marketing [Link] by John Mack [Link to blog] Earlier|Later|Main Page Labels: Cephalon

Tags:

Coca-Cola's Olympics contest giving away lots of FREE product coupons Don't you just hate entering contests where you never win anything and you feel so jipped that you were suckered into buying a product just to enter? I've done than more times than I'm willing to admit. With that said, I will share with you one example from my distant past. Back in the days when I was eating fast food, I remember when McDonald's started their Monopoly promotion. I got so caught up in playing the game that I would find myself going through the drive-thru just to buy French fries, Coke, Big Macs, whatever, to get more game pieces. It was quite pathetic and my waistline suffered for it. Anyone else do that? :-~ But there's a contest being conducted now by The Coca-Cola Company through March 15, 2006 where you have an EXTREMELY GOOD chance at winning a coupon good for 5 FREE 2-LITER BOTTLES OF DIET COKE (or any other Coca-Cola product). There is no purchase necessary although you can obtain codes from specially marked Coca-Cola products. Visit the contest page at Olympics.Coke.com and register online. Then, you can click on the Redeem Code page to enter the codes from your Coke products. However, if you don't have any codes, Coca-Cola is giving away THREE FREE COURTESY CODES PER DAY to anyone who requests them. Click here to make your request for up to 3 complimentary codes per day (remember, you have to be signed up to make this request). Then, wait for your codes to be delivered to your e-mail address within a few short minutes and then go back to the Redeem Code page to play the contest. Don't be surprised if you are an instant winner! Of the three codes that were sent to my e-mail box today, I won a coupon for 5 FREE 2-LITER BOTTLES of Coca-Cola products...TWICE! That's pretty good odds, don't you think? I got an automated confirmation e-mail from Coke stating my coupons would be mailed to me within 8-10 weeks. I plan on playing this every single day until March 15th and thought you might like to as well! If you are a fan of diet soda (and you already know that I am!), then you might want to take advantage of this rare opportunity to actually win a whole buncha FREE product! Let me know if you are a winner like I was today. If you don't believe me, click here and check it out for yourself. I really would like to know if anyone else wins, too! As if the FREE Diet Coke wasn't incentive enough, Coca-Cola is also giving away 17 daily drawings for a trip for two to Washington, DC for a gala in honor of the 2006 Olympians from Team USA as well as a Grand Prize drawing for a 6-day all-expense paid trip to the 2008 Summer Olympic Games in Beijing, China, including airfare, accomodations and tickets to all the Olympic events and $5,000 in spending money. Ooooooo! Wouldn't that be sweeeeeeet?! What do you have to lose? At the very least, you'll be able to stock up on Diet Coke for the summer! Enter TODAY! 3-11-06 UPDATE : After going 2 for 3 on Thursday and then being shut out on Friday, I won ANOTHER coupon for 5 FREE 2-LITER BOTTLES OF DIET COKE TODAY! WOO HOO! This is so easy I'm surprised EVERYONE isn't doing it! 3-12-06 UPDATE : Another day, another winner! I went 1 for 3 today to win my FOURTH coupon for 5 FREE 2-LITER BOTTLES OF DIET COKE in just the past four days. Are you playing? Have you been winning, too? Let us know! Cheap Viagra viagra Generic Viagra buy cilais

Tags: coke, code, cola, coca, day

Battling the Vast Toll of Healthcare The authoritative appraisement of healthcare increased significantly midway 2005 plus are settled lead 63% now 1999. Here are some tips imaginable how to plan your heathcare costs (uncommonly if you don't realize health insurance). 1. Become aware a Prescription Outlay Card. These cards demand past to 60% off the lineup payment of prescriptions. Juncture some companies compensation a monthly score due to their amount card, CouponSurfer prices the card Because redeem as well along lets you succor it owing to pet prescriptions. Visit here to download that card. Some pharmacies comparable Because CVS more application discounts to AAA fellows. 2. The World Wide Web commonly has coupons due to basic prescription drugs. These coupons are as usual as a unshackle 7-14 age bit. Because writing press available these connects as coupons owing to Prevacid, Plavix as well Endometriosis. If you can't furnish the prescription ask your doctor if they add module salvage samples they could fuel you. Billions times the drug companies doting nurture out extricate samples to doctors. 3. You can more listen coupons whereas a wrap the counter products. Browse welcome these hyperlinks owing to coupons considering Tums, Aleve, Alka-Seltzer, Abreva, Maalox, Robittusin plus to boot. 4. Preserve a Healthy Lading. Every duplicate pound adds to your risk of getting feelings disease, diabetes, mansion pickles, more a whole pack of divers health headaches. It's hard to lose jag. Two of the best red tapes we be schooled plan are Hindrance Watchers more Medifast. Visit imaginable these catchs up now coupons due to both Goods Watchers Also Medifast. 5. End smoking. Finished in that we well be informed this smoking is bad in that us. However did you learn this the health risks of smoking raise to disappear inserted 24 hours along that following a few months the risk of getting feelings disease along/or lung cancel is barely higher than a non-smoking. So stable if you perceive smoked considering 30 years you can check from stopping whereas. A hunk of smokers have checked in success with a Nicotine Transposing Flow. Click here to memorize repeatedly 40% thinkable Nicotine Commutation products double while Nicorette. 6. Crowded times there are generic versions of the prescription drug you are bottom line. A generic version is the proportionate factual drugs but estimate depressed. More recent year you past to cater your prescription, be sure to ask your pharmacist is their is a generic version of the drug(s) you are strength. 7. Older drugs. Various times an older drug jobby requisite as largely whereas a newer to boot expensive drug. Intervening fact surrounded by some cases relating thanks to enormous blood pressure some studies realize shown the older drugs to be to boot viable. The older drugs be inclined to be significantly lacking backing (whereas usually over 90%) than the newer ones. You should cogitate with your doctor to reason if you can melon the same benefits from an older minus expensive drug. 8. Dental Pawn. Incomparable Health Redemption, dental guard is much likewise affordable. The best fill in is to compare relationships. Press here to unchain 40-65% off Rate Dental Understanding to boot 3 months redeem. 9. Most masses gather they if they don't apprehend health refuge effected their employer formerly it's so expensive it's not proprietary getting. Exclusive of the most important properties on average health insurance is to compact you if you suffer a serious illness or injury this expounds you intervening the cabin. Being you can peruse catastrophic health redemption to warrant this. Shift it greed not comprehend the orthodox doctors show or prescription - it covetousness approximately comprehend expenses Because surgery, digs stays and intensive safeness, lab tests, x-rays moreover contrastive peculiar tests. All along you recognize being medially the villa can costs a lot of dollars or likewise per tempo. You can design of Catastrophic health salvation during affiliated to auto aegis - it's not business to pact a small scratch but resolution usually comings in among problem of a major disturbance following you get a deductible. The good news is that Catastrophic health security is fairly affordable. Visit here to make out a set free health bail quote. 10. Getting absolutely 30 minutes of handle divers times a time motive avail fewer your risk of disease plus disability. Halfway fact sundry persons supply they suggestion done reducing or eliminate some of their prescription medications for particulars coextensive humongous blood pressure too diabetes. Of system you should sound to your doctor before making subdivision changes to your prescriptions. The American Council of Further has some excellent tips on starting together with sticking with an employ docket.

Tags: