|
1
|
- Over-the-Counter and On-the-Air
- The Advertising of OTC Drug Products
|
|
2
|
- Consumer HealthCare Products Association (CHPA)
- and
- Food and Drug Administration
|
|
3
|
- Sandy Barnes, FDA
- Greg Collier, P&G
- Robert Eshelman, FDA
- Mark Gelbert, Pfizer
- David Hilfiker, FDA
- Susan James, GlaxoSmithKline
- Iris Khalaf, FDA
- Karen Lechter, FDA
- Lorna Totman, CHPA
- Mitchell Weitzman, FDA
|
|
4
|
- To promote a better FDA and industry understanding of the unique
challenges in the present and future OTC healthcare environment.
|
|
5
|
- Over-the-Counter and On-the-Air
- The Advertising of OTC Drug Products
- May 13, 2004
|
|
6
|
- Leah Cutter, Ph.D
- Regulatory Health Project Manager, Division of
- Over-the-Counter Drug Products
- Doreen Frank
- Associate Director Regulatory Affairs, Schering-Plough
- Janice McSherry
- Assistant General Counsel, GlaxoSmithKline
- Paul Sturman
- Sr. Vice-President Marketing, Pfizer
|
|
7
|
- Welcome - David Hilfiker
- Introduction and Seminar Objectives - Doreen Frank
- Advertising “101” - Paul Sturman
- Advertising Claims - Going Beyond the Label - Janice McSherry
- Advertising Review and Approval Process - Doreen Frank
- 15 minute Break
- Advertising Self-Regulation: It’s Role in Food, Drug and Dietary
Supplement Advertising - Andrea Levine
- FDA’s Role in OTC Advertising and Promotion - Leah Cutter
- FTC’s Role in OTC Drug Advertising - Mary Engle
- Q & A
- Closing Remarks - Mark Gelbert
|
|
8
|
- Seminar Objectives
- Understand how industry develops, supports, approves and executes
advertising to support their OTC drug products.
- Discuss FDA, NAD and FTC’s role, policies and procedures as they relate
to maintaining truth and accuracy in OTC drug advertising.
|
|
9
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
11
|
- Has always been a good way to inform;
- Introducing a new product
- Suggesting new uses for a product
- Explaining how a product works
- Correcting false impressions
- Persuade;
- Building brand preference
- Encouraging switching
- Changing buyer perceptions of product attributes
- Remind.
- Top of mind awareness
- Where to buy
- Seasonal/ off-season
|
|
12
|
|
|
13
|
- Mass Media
- Broadcast
- Print
- Display
- Billboards, signs, posters
- Event Marketing
- Press conferences, exhibits, tours, grand openings
- Direct Marketing
- Direct Mail, Catalog, Telemarketing, DRTV, Internet/On-line
|
|
14
|
- Complex 12-18 mos. process with multiple checks & balances
- Substantial media budgets (>$25MM) are built to reach ~80% of the
target audience over 4 times for an average 4 week period.
|
|
15
|
|
|
16
|
- Changing buying behavior requires a deep understanding of the consumer’s
underlying wants, needs, and
current behaviors
- The emotional component of this connection between brand and consumer
should not be underestimated
- Unique learning techniques such as adcepts and anthropological research
are important tools in this exploration.
|
|
17
|
- Anthropological research Skin/UR
|
|
18
|
|
|
19
|
- Insure that we are meeting communication objectives.
- Insure no unintended, misleading communication.
- Insure that we are providing a relevant message that results in a
positive change in buying behavior.
- Mitigate risk of costly production.
- Enhance probability of positive in-market results and avoid of wasteful
media spend.
|
|
20
|
|
|
21
|
- Brand Recall
- How good is the commercial at getting you to remember it a day after
viewing?
- Persuasion
- How motivating is the commercial at changing your attitude towards
considering a brand after seeing it?
- Main idea/product attribute playback and “likeability”
|
|
22
|
- Advertising that scores above norms within its respective category
across several key measures, particularly brand recall and persuasion
(intent to purchase).
- Advertising that “scores” positive change with consumer behavior in the
marketplace.
|
|
23
|
|
|
24
|
- Approved ingredients (NDA, monograph, cosmetic) are basis for claims
- Certain categories have additional “approvals” required, e.g. ADA
- Strict requirements around product usage (as directed, do not exceed)
and product labeling
- Bigger creative challenge as people are not well (no big promise).
|
|
25
|
- FTC regulates OTC advertising while FDA regulates DTC advertising.
- Brand preference in an existing need state/condition
- DTC needs to educate about a disease state
- Establish sickness, involve intermediary, possible brand solution
|
|
26
|
|
|
27
|
- Clearly defined objective and target
- Convince non-users of mouthwash to try New Natural Citrus Listerine
- Strategy that differentiates
- All the germ killing power of regular Listerine with a new taste that
is less intense
- Leverages important consumer insight
- People generally know that Listerine is effective, but some don’t use
it because they find it too strong.
- Key Challenge
- Speak to non-users about the “downside” of using regular Listerine
WITHOUT disparaging the base franchise
|
|
28
|
- Natural Citrus Listerine ad
|
|
29
|
- Janice McSherry
- Assistant General Counsel
- GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare
- May 13, 2004
|
|
30
|
- Regulatory Compliance
- Federal Trade Commission
- Food & Drug Administration
- Legal Approvals
- Company Policy
- Trademarks, Copyrights
- Legal Precedence
- Litigation Risk
- Network Standards
- Voluntary Codes
- Medical Appropriateness
- Scientific Validity
- Typicality
- Marketing Goals
- Consumer Acceptance and Persuasion
- Competitive Strategy
- Internal Approvals
- External Clearances
- Senior Executives
|
|
31
|
- Companies like ours are serious when it comes to advertising claims
support
- Most have cross-functional teams comprised of Regulatory, Medical, Legal
and Brand Managers among others to review claims and support
- Whether an ad is fully substantiated is never a certainty
- The decision to air is ultimately made by senior managers
- assessing risk against benefit to business
- in consideration of all viewpoints
|
|
32
|
- Failure to have robust substantiation for the commercial may result in
serious, costly and even unlawful consequences:
- failure to gain network approval
- challenge by a competitor
- regulatory inquiry by
- the Federal Trade Commission
- State Attorneys General
- the Food and Drug Administration
- litigation by a public interest group or class action attorney
- The most common serious consequence is the disruption of the ad campaign
|
|
33
|
- National advertisers must meet the FTC standard of truthful and not
misleading advertising claims
- All material claims must be substantiated by a reasonable basis of
support
- Health-related claims require the highest level of reliable and
competent support because consumers cannot always judge product
performance for themselves
- Advertisers must have evidence to back up their claims
- Establishment claims that mention a test or survey must have that
specific support
- The ads cannot make unfair comparisons
|
|
34
|
- The product label can guide a review team as it determines a reasonable
basis for the claim support
- The risk often correlates to the product’s regulatory status:
- NDA “Switch” Drug and labeling had the most rigorous review
- Monograph OTC Drug contains an approved active ingredient
- Approved Device
- Approved Cosmetic Ingredient
- Dietary Supplement -no regulatory review of label claims
- However, ad claims are not limited to label claims
|
|
35
|
- Express claims are direct statements
- “relieves heartburn”
- “stops headache pain”
- Implied claims are inferred, usually by context
- “relieves heartburn . . . so you can enjoy life”
- “stops headache pain . . . so that you can get a good night’s sleep”
- Potential over-promising of speed or quality of life benefits
- Puffery is an exception - no substantiation required
- claims that a consumer would not take seriously such as
hyperbole or subjective statements
- “freshness that just won’t quit”
- “aisle 5 is full of Sudafed”
|
|
36
|
- Monadic claims pose the lowest risk
- “Tums relieves heartburn”
- “Polident works overnight”
- Comparative claims create uncertainty
- Superiority claims increase risk of challenge
- “Tums neutralizes acid faster than Zantac or Pepcid”
- “Sensodyne is the #1 Dentist-Recommended Brand”
- Parity claims can be the riskiest
- “No calcium is better absorbed”
- “Nothing works faster”
- Can be interpreted as implied superiority claims
|
|
37
|
|
|
38
|
- Beyond FTC’s reasonable basis requirement, companies must assess these
risks and hurdles:
- Nature of the product and the strength of the underlying science
- Industry Voluntary Codes and Guidelines
- Network Clearance
- Litigation Risk
- The competitive environment and the likelihood of challenge
- The relative value of the claims to the business
- Are these “throw away” claims?
|
|
39
|
- Innovative product, or line extension?
- Custom testing or borrowed science?
- Clinicals or Lab tests?
- In-house studies, or peer-reviewed, published literature?
- Well-tested, typical use or novel and unknown?
- Approved indication or unique benefit?
- Accepted methods or proprietary technique?
- New survey or old data?
|
|
40
|
- 4 major and many cable networks have Broadcast Standards Departments
- published guidelines apply to TV and radio
- “white coat” restriction
- “follow label directions,” “occasional use” requirements
- Review of storyboards first, then finished ads
- Formal Challenge Process
- note: Federal Communication Commission sets decency standards but does not
regulate advertising
- for programming between 6 a.m.-10 p.m.
- exceptions: children’s programming and political advertising
|
|
41
|
- There are many potential plaintiffs. A reliable review process should
anticipate challenges from:
- Regulatory authorities
- Competitors
- Consumers
- Public interest groups
- Class action attorneys
|
|
42
|
- National advertisers of OTC Drug Products expend substantial resources
to ensure that they deliver truthful and not misleading advertising that
complies with the numerous requirements discussed here
- Companies rely heavily on their Review Teams to assess the risk of each
product claim against the benefit to the business
- To that end, most companies have established procedures to make the
analysis a bit more reliable and less worrisome
|
|
43
|
|
|
44
|
- Process ensures compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and
guidelines, as well as internal company policies
- Process ensures all claims are adequately substantiated
- All OTC drug advertising is reviewed and approved by an appointed
committee - a core group consisting of Law, Medical, Regulatory and
Marketing
|
|
45
|
- Meets regularly, often weekly, to review advertising
- Each Committee representative is responsible for reviewing the
advertising with respective to their area of expertise prior to the
meeting
|
|
46
|
- At the meeting - the Committee reviews materials and collectively:
- provides an assessment on the adequacy of claims substantiation
- advice on such items as proper wording of claims, likely net impression
of claims, tonality, and “taste” of the material
- ensures conformance to laws, regulations, guidelines, and internal
standards of conduct
- reviews materials based on legal/regulatory precedent (i.e. case law, NAD, FTC
challenges)
|
|
47
|
|
|
48
|
- Companies develop Corporate Policy and Procedures to ensure the review
of all advertising through a defined process
- Companies also develop Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) to make sure
the process is followed
- A formalized training program is established for all users
- All advertising material must be approved by the Committee (or
Committee Representative) prior to dissemination to the consumer and/or
healthcare professional
|
|
49
|
- Industry works closely with Advertising Agencies to ensure that all
advertising pieces are reviewed and approved through the Advertising
Review and Approval process
- Additional procedures and guidelines are often developed to assist the
Advertising Agencies
- Training sessions are provided to the Advertising Agencies allowing
account representatives to understand the Company’s internal process
|
|
50
|
- Advertising “101”
- Development Process
- Consumer Insight
- Multi-disciplinary Effort
- Advertising Claim Substantiation
- Claims Substantiation - Requirements
- Different Types of Claims
- Advertising Review and Approval Process
|
|
51
|
- Andrea C. Levine, Director
- National Advertising Division
|
|
52
|
- To protect the integrity of advertising by ensuring that claims are
truthful and accurate
- Discourage unnecessary government involvement in advertising
|
|
53
|
- Consumer confidence increases
- Advertisers can govern themselves
- Quick dispute resolution
- Level playing field
- Cost effective alternative to litigation
- Frees up government resources
|
|
54
|
- Jurisdiction over advertising that is:
- Targeted to adults (over 12)
- “National in scope”
- Objectively provable claim
- Print
- Packaging & labels
- Broadcast: TV, radio, infomercials
- Direct Mail
- Internet
|
|
55
|
- Advertising must be truthful, accurate and not misleading
- What is the message conveyed?
- What is the support?
- Is there a good fit?
|
|
56
|
- No Wrongdoers/No Punishment
- Decisions Guide & Educate
- Can Rebut Reasonable Basis
- - Evidence Materially Flawed
- - Better Evidence: Different Result
|
|
57
|
- 96% voluntary compliance rate
- No “enforcement power”
- Referred cases go the the top of FTC’s pile (FDA, FCC, DOT, State AG’s)
- Slim America ($8.3 Million judgment)
- Many elect to return to voluntary self-regulation
|
|
58
|
- Relatively simple process
- Two rounds of submissions
- Ex parte meetings with scientists and experts
- Published decision in about 4-5 months
- Detailed analysis—fair hearing (116 appeals)
- Appeals to NARB
|
|
59
|
- Brilliant legal opinions
- Detailed summary of the parties positions
- In depth analysis of claim substantiation
- Conclusion: Substantiated, Modify or Discontinue
- Subscribe www.nadreview.org
|
|
60
|
- Advertising claims can be technically truthful
- But still misleading
- What is the “net impression”?
|
|
61
|
|
|
62
|
- Advertisers are obligated to support all reasonable messages conveyed by
their advertisements
- Not just the messages they intended to convey
- Extrinsic evidence not necessary
|
|
63
|
|
|
64
|
- Vague, fanciful, hyperbolic claims that consumers are unlikely to take
seriously
- Claims not capable of verification or measurement
- No substantiation required
- An objectively provable claim needs proof
- Even if it is funny (Humor not always puffing)
- Even if you sing it (You may still need to prove it)
|
|
65
|
|
|
66
|
|
|
67
|
|
|
68
|
|
|
69
|
|
|
70
|
|
|
71
|
|
|
72
|
- NAD closely scrutinizes claims that denigrate a competitors product
- NAD’s handling of these claims differs from the courts
- The claim should be narrowly drawn, truthful, accurate and not
misleading
- Humor helps--sometimes
|
|
73
|
|
|
74
|
|
|
75
|
|
|
76
|
- NAD’s jurisdiction to review Rx advertising is concurrent with FDA’s
- Depending on the circumstances
- NAD will independently review the claims
- NAD will defer to FDA
|
|
77
|
|
|
78
|
|
|
79
|
- Back up and support- Slim America case
- Encourage advertisers to participate in the self-regulatory process
- Refer competitor challenges to NAD
- Follow up on our referrals
|
|
80
|
|
|
81
|
- The information contained in these slides is not intended to announce
new CDER policy or any change to existing CDER policy.
- The views and opinions expressed herein are my own and do not represent
an official position on behalf of FDA.
|
|
82
|
- How inquiries and complaints regarding OTC drug product advertising come
to FDA
- FDA “review” process
- Interactions with FTC (Federal Trade Commission)
|
|
83
|
- Received from:
- Competing companies
- Division of Drug Marketing, Advertising and Communications (DDMAC)
- CDER Ombudsman
- Consumers
- Received by:
- Division of Over-the-Counter Drug Products (DOTCDP)
- Office of Compliance
|
|
84
|
- Advertising versus Labeling
- Case by case determination
- What is labeling?
- Legal definition in FD&C Act
- 201(m) “Labeling”
- “The term “labeling” means all labels, and other written, printed, or
graphic matter (1) upon any article or any of its containers or
wrappers, or (2) accompanying such article.”
- Physical attachment not necessary
- Textual relationship is significant
|
|
85
|
- Labeling:
- Based on legal definition
- CDER Office of Compliance
- Advertising:
- FDA/DOTCDP reviews clinical data from trials
- Data supports claim
- Data makes claim false or misleading, or doesn’t support
- If claim(s) not supported by data, sent to FTC for their review and
action
|
|
86
|
|
|
87
|
- Mary K. Engle, Esq.
- Associate Director
- Division of Advertising Practices
- Bureau of Consumer Protection
|
|
88
|
- Interaction with FDA
- Basics of FTC Advertising Law
- OTC Drug Enforcement
|
|
89
|
- Two agencies have overlapping authority over OTC drug marketing
- Longstanding liaison agreement
- FDA: Labeling
- FTC: Advertising
- Staffs of agencies coordinate closely
|
|
90
|
- Primarily a law enforcement agency
- Broad liability: advertiser, ad agency, endorser …
- Wide variety of remedies: warning, injunction, refunds, disgorgement of
profits, corrective advertising …
- Administrative or Federal courts
|
|
91
|
- Section 5 of FTC Act: prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices
- An act or practice is
deceptive if it misleads consumers acting reasonably under
circumstances and is material to the purchase/use decision
- Section 12: prohibits any “false advertisement” that is “misleading in a
material respect”
|
|
92
|
- Two basic principles:
- 1. Advertising must be truthful and not misleading
- 2. Objective claims must be substantiated before they are made
|
|
93
|
- Apply a “reasonable consumer” standard
- Look at both express and implied claims: what is overall “net”
impression of the ad
- There may be more than one reasonable interpretation of an ad
- Ad may need to disclose “material” information, i.e., info affecting
purchase/use decision
|
|
94
|
- “Clear and conspicuous”*
- Prominence: Is it big enough for consumers to notice and read?
- Presentation: Is wording and format easy for consumers to understand?
- Placement: Is it where consumers
look and near the claim it qualifies?
|
|
95
|
|
|
96
|
- Advertiser needs “reasonable basis” for claims before ad runs
- Depends on nature of claim:
- Type of product
- Type of claim
- Benefits of truthful claim and cost/feasibility of developing
substantiation
- Consequences of false claim
- What do experts in the field expect
|
|
97
|
- Examples of increasing levels of substantiation:
- “Brand X comes in three delicious flavors”
- “4 out of 5 physicians recommend Brand X over Brand Y”
- “Brand X is an effective treatment for arthritis pain”
|
|
98
|
- Claims related to health and safety generally must be supported by:
- “Competent and reliable scientific evidence”
|
|
99
|
- Tests, analyses, research, studies, or other evidence based on the
expertise of professionals in the relevant area, that has been conducted
and evaluated in an objective manner by persons qualified to do so,
using procedures generally accepted in the profession to yield accurate
and reliable results.
|
|
100
|
- FTC relies heavily on FDA expertise to evaluate claims of drug safety
and efficacy
- Flexible but rigorous standard (depends on how claim is qualified)
- No fixed formula
- Well-controlled clinical studies should always be starting point
- Anecdotal experiences are not science
|
|
101
|
- Evidence must be relevant to the product and the claim
- Population studied
- Dose/formulation
- Extent/nature/permanence of effect
- Certainty of science
|
|
102
|
|
|
103
|
- The FTC traditionally has been active in bringing cases against
deceptive OTC drug ads.
- Seminal FTC advertising law decisions involved claims for OTC drugs:
- Pfizer (1972) – substantiation principles;
- Thompson Medical (1984) – ad interpretation principles;
- Warner-Lambert (1977) and Ciba-Geigy (now Novartis) (2000) - corrective
advertising remedy.
|
|
104
|
|
|
105
|
- The FTC has not brought many OTC drug consumer protection cases
recently.
- Instead, major focus in recent years:
dietary supplement and weight loss advertising.
|
|
106
|
|
|
107
|
|
|
108
|
- FTC staff continues to actively monitor and investigate claims made in
OTC drug ads, especially efficacy claims and claims that a drug has “no
side effects.”
- For example, the Division of Advertising Practices maintains an OTC Drug
Advertising Database to track information on a number of elements (such
as major claims) of OTC drug ads.
|
|
109
|
- Nature of claim:
- Does the deception relate to the drug’s efficacy or side effects?
- Can the consumer independently gauge whether the drug performs as
advertised?
|
|
110
|
- Does the deception cause consumer injury (health and/or economic):
- Is there injury to health if product does not worked as claimed?
- Will the false claims lead consumers to forgo more effective
treatments?
- How widely was the advertisement disseminated?
- Does the product cost more than comparable products?
|
|
111
|
- Bayer (consent order 2000):
Unsubstantiated claims that regular use of aspirin is appropriate
therapy for the prevention of heart attacks and strokes in the general
population.
- Pfizer (consent order 1998):
False and unsubstantiated claims for lice shampoo, e.g. clinical
studies prove that the shampoo cures lice infestations in a single
treatment.
- Ciba-Geigy/Novartis (litigated order 2000): Deceptive superiority claims for
Doan’s pills; efficacy was comparable to other pain relievers, and
Doan’s charged a substantial price premium over those products.
|
|
112
|
- Is FTC action in the public interest?
- Is a claim likely to be challenged by a competitor under the Lanham
Act?
- Has the NAD reviewed the claim?
If NAD refers the ad to us, we give it a close look.
|
|
113
|
- The FTC staff will continue to monitor OTC advertising and bring cases
to prevent consumer injury. What
kinds of deceptive claims are the focus?
- Credence claims (where consumers can’t judge claims for themselves)
- Efficacy and safety claims
- Harm to consumers over harm to competitors
|
|
114
|
- The staff will take a hard look at claims made when an Rx drug goes OTC
because of the prospect that consumers will be misled or confused
following the change.
- Difference in dosage
- Difference in indications
- Touchstone is consumer injury
|