healthy4u: Zyprexa

Pharmacy Benefit Managers as Pharmaceutical Marketers

We posted a number of times about questionable practices Eli Lilly used to market its atypical anti-psychotic drug Zyprexa (olanzapine). A post from 2007, with links backward, is <a href="http://hcrenewal.blogspot.com/2007/02/more-on-zyprexa-memos.html">here</a>, and our most recent post is <a href="http://hcrenewal.blogspot.com/2009/06/handbook-for-ghost-writing.html">here</a>. The company remains entangled in litigation over its marketing of this drug. That litigation has lead to the release of numerous internal documents that provide quite a view of Lilly's marketing practices. Bloomberg continued its reporting on these documents, with its latest effort <a href="http://www.boston.com/business/healthcare/articles/2009/06/14/zyprexa_suit_highlights_cvs_links_to_lilly/">here</a> via the Boston Globe, describing yet another surprising way this drug was sold: <blockquote> A unit of CVS Caremark Corp. used its access to doctors to market Eli Lilly & Co.'s Zyprexa antipsychotic while it was under contract to bargain with the drug maker on behalf of health insurers, internal Lilly files disclosed in a multibillion-dollar lawsuit by insurers show. The subsidiary of CVS, the largest US drugstore chain, touted Zyprexa starting in 2003, according to e-mails made public by lawyers suing Lilly for overpayment. CVS's AdvancePCS, a pharmacy benefit manager, or PBM, offered to send 120,000 letters to doctors promoting the drug, Lilly's top-seller with $4.7 billion in sales last year, according to a confidential 2004 proposal. The CVS unit said it would charge $5 per letter. AdvancePCS, acquired by Woonsocket, R.I.-based CVS in 2007, said in the documents that the direct-mail campaign was 'designed to influence key prescribers' as part of a 'tactical plan for Zyprexa.' </blockquote> Furthermore, <blockquote> In AdvancePCS's 2004 pitch to Lilly offering to send out letters promoting Zyprexa, Kevin Aholt, the company's assistant vice president in charge of strategic alliances, said he could target physicians based 'on the most recent AdvancePCS claims data,' according to the unsealed documents. Aholt also said that one of the 'key issues' in the market for antipsychotic drugs was finding ways to 'accelerate the growth of new patient starts,' according to the proposal. </blockquote> Also, <blockquote> Steven Fuchs, an official at the PBM, asked Lilly officials in an April 2004 e-mail whether he should include information about Zyprexa's ability to calm agitated patients in the next round of letters to doctors. 'Would a discussion of that be something you would want to include?' Fuchs asked, according to the document. Lilly marketing executive Scott Dell responded in an e-mail that officials at the drug maker had discussed asking AdvancePCS to include material highlighting 'the new bipolar maintenance indication for Zyprexa.' </blockquote> AdvancePCS was not the only pharmacy benefits manager (PBM) that offered to help sell Zyprexa. <blockquote> CVS rival Express Scripts Inc. also sent out Zyprexa marketing letters, according to the unsealed documents and also isn't named as a defendant in the suits. </blockquote> So here we have at least two pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) offering to help market a particular drug, for money, of course. What is the problem here? <blockquote> CVS's contracts with insurers and pensions meanwhile place it in an adversarial posture with Lilly, requiring it to use its buying power as leverage in drug-price negotiations. 'The problem is that PBMs are negotiating these hidden deals while at the same time telling employers that they represent them at the negotiating table,' said Gerry Purcell, a former PBM executive who advises companies on their drug plans. 'These documents will add fuel to the perception that the companies and the PBMs are in cahoots with each other.' </blockquote> Also, <blockquote> While PBMs negotiate on behalf of insurers, most states don't designate them as agents of the benefit plans, said Robert Garis, a pharmacy professor at Creighton University in Omaha who studies the industry. As a result, they aren't legally required to act only in the best interest of their clients, he said. Maine is one of a few states that have specified PBMs as fiduciaries, or agents, he noted. 'The companies have gotten around that by adding language to their contracts that exclude them from having to meet those fiduciary duties,' Garis said. </blockquote> Apparently, in this case, one PBM said it disclosed its relationship to the drug company to physicians, but it is not clear whether it was disclosed to the health care insurers and managed care organizations which paid the PBM to reduce the costs of drugs: <blockquote> CVS, which isn't a defendant in the Lilly suit, said that it tells doctors when it has 'financial relationships' with drug makers and that they are free to opt out of mailings. 'To engage in a point/counterpoint in a media outlet rather than in court would not be productive,' said Lilly spokeswoman Marni Lemons. Lemons declined to answer specific queries about the CVS or Express Scripts letters, whether Lilly paid for the practice, or other questions raised by the unsealed documents.... CVS said in its e-mailed statement that it has 'no active educational programs' related to Zyprexa. 'CVS Caremark discloses to its PBM clients that it may have financial relationships with pharmaceutical manufacturers in connection with these educational programs,' said Christine Cramer, a spokeswoman for the chain. 'CVS Caremark's PBM clients are aware of these programs and have the opportunity to opt out.' Maria Palumbo, a spokeswoman for Express Scripts, didn't respond to eight telephone and e-mail requests seeking comment. CVS covers 82 million people, with a market share of 12 percent, and is the largest pharmacy benefit manager, according to Atlantic Information Services. Express Scripts, which covers 55 million people, is the fifth largest. PBMs process about 75 percent of the retail prescriptions written annually in the United States, according to the insurance plans. The insurance plans sued the drug maker in 2005, contending it used researchers, pharmacy benefit managers, advocacy groups, and public agencies to promote Zyprexa. </blockquote> Whether or not the PBMs disclosed their relationships to the pharmaceutical company to everyone who might be interested, it does seem that having PBMs who are supposed to help insurers and managed care organizations control drug costs be paid by pharmaceutical companies to market drugs is yet another new species of institutional conflict of interest. Like the many other conflicts of interest, individual and institutional, we have discussed, this one appears to be mutually advantageous to the parties involved. However, it could have adverse consequences for physicians, patients, and the health care system. If the organizations that are supposed to be controlling drug costs are also promoting expensive drugs, the likely result would be excess prescription of expensive drugs to patients who may not derive benefits from the drugs outweighing their harms. This is another reminder how much we need more sunshine shone on the multitudinous conflicts of interest affecting just about every type of actor within the current US health care system.

Pharmacy Benefit Managers as Pharmaceutical Marketers

We posted a number of times about questionable practices Eli Lilly used to market its atypical anti-psychotic drug Zyprexa ( olanzapine ). ...

Đọc thêm »

A Handbook for Ghost-Writing

We posted a number of times about questionable practices Eli Lilly used to market its atypical anti-psychotic drug Zyprexa (olanzapine). A post from 2007, with links backward, is <a href="http://hcrenewal.blogspot.com/2007/02/more-on-zyprexa-memos.html">here</a>, and our most recent post is <a href="http://hcrenewal.blogspot.com/2009/01/what-me-worry-lilly-fined-over-zyprexa.html">here</a>. The company remains entangled in litigation over its marketing of this drug. That litigation has lead to the release of numerous internal documents that provide quite a view of Lilly's marketing practices. In particular, a Bloomberg <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=aVvfe.v1k_VY">news article </a>discussed how the company used ghost-writers: <blockquote> Ensuring that medical journal articles presented Zyprexa study results in a positive light was one way for Lilly to reach its sales goal, company officials said in its plan, according to the documents. To do that, Lilly officials hired ghostwriters to prepare submissions to journals such as Progress in Neurology and Psychiatry, according to the unsealed documents. </blockquote> The article then described how Lilly marketers set up a ghost-written article. <blockquote> 'The paper for the Progress in Neurology and Psychiatry supplement has been completed and sent to the journal for peer review,' Kerrie Mitchell, an employee of the public relations agency Cohn & Wolfe, wrote in a Feb. 23, 2001, e-mail to Michael Sale, a Lilly marketing official. The message was among the unsealed files. 'We ‘ghost’ wrote this article and then worked with author Dr. Haddad to work up the final copy,' Mitchell said in the e- mail. Eric Litchfield, a spokesman for Cohn & Wolfe, didn’t immediately return a call seeking comment. Peter Haddad, a researcher at Greater Manchester West Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust in the U.K., was listed as the article’s lead author. Haddad didn’t respond to requests for comment. The global Lilly team approved a draft of Haddad’s ghost- written paper in 2000, according to the unsealed documents. </blockquote> Lilly marketers, rather than articles' putative authors, sometimes exerted pressure to get ghost-written articles published. For example, <blockquote> Lilly officials e-mailed journal editors to complain about delays in publishing favorable Zyprexa articles, according to the unsealed documents. In one instance, Lilly employees contacted the Journal of Clinical Epidemiology about delays of an article criticizing a previously published piece linking Zyprexa, as well as the class of atypical antipsychotics, to diabetes. After Suraja Roychowdhury, Lilly’s senior scientific communications coordinator, wrote to the journal in November 2002, its editor, Andre Knottnerus, replied in an e-mail that it was 'a bit strange to be contacted via the Lilly product team. Dr. Buse and coauthors can contact us directly next time.' Knottnerus was referring to the manuscript’s lead author, John Buse, a former president of the American Diabetes Association. A copy of the Nov. 22, 2002, e-mail was included in the unsealed documents. Patrizia Cavazzoni, a Lilly staffer who co-wrote the article, e-mailed Buse on Jan. 9, 2003, seeking permission to send a separate e-mail asking to expedite publication. She also asked Buse if he would prefer 'to send it in your name?' It isn’t clear from the e-mail chain whether the e-mail was sent by Buse or Cavazzoni. </blockquote> Finally, Lilly developed a handbook for ghost-writers: <blockquote> To ensure that ghostwritten Zyprexa articles met Lilly’s standards, company officials issued a guide to preparing them, according to the unsealed files. The guide, 'Medical Press: Pre-Launch Feature Outline,' was undated. It’s unclear from the documents which teams in Lilly’s top 10 markets for the drug received it. The primer provided a how-to for writing articles, such as instructing the author to use Zyprexa’s generic name, olanzapine, instead of its brand moniker, according to the documents. Scientists in medical research traditionally refer to a drug’s chemical name. The guide also offered tips on how to find authors by identifying a 'key opinion leader' and providing them either an outline of the article or a finished copy. Authors could include a study investigator, an advisory board member or “Lilly-friendly” doctor, according to the documents. A sample article laid out how a Lilly employee may find a doctor to ghostwrite a submission that would 'prepare the market' for the launch of an intramuscular injectable version of the drug. It also offered an outline for the contents of the article, beginning with background on another drug, droperidol, which had been withdrawn from several countries. The article, with the suggested title 'Filling the Droperidol Gap,' noted that an anti-anxiety drug could be used, before going on to say, 'more advanced IM treatments may soon be available to provide a superior alternative.' The article explained that injectable Zyprexa had just received approval from the FDA, and recounted its clinical trial history. 'The anticipated forthcoming availability of atypical antipsychotics in an IM formulation could be a major step forward in the treatment of acute agitation associated with schizophrenia,' the sample article concluded. </blockquote> We addressed ghost-writing frequently when we started Health Care Renewal, and have returned to the topic periodically (see these more recent links, from 2008, <a href="http://hcrenewal.blogspot.com/2008/04/ghosts-come-home-to-roost.html">here</a> and <a href="http://hcrenewal.blogspot.com/2008/12/haunting-of-hormone-replacement-therapy.html">here</a>). The most striking feature of this newest case is the use of a "ghost-writers' handbook" denoting how systematized the practice has become. With each new case, it becomes clearer how common the practice may be. Since the parties involved seem ashamed enough of the practice to try to keep it well hidden, it may be that ghost-writing is even more common than we now realize. Nonetheless, while the practice may be common, and mutually advantageous for ghost-writers, the academics who front for them, and the marketers who hire them all, as we and others have <a href="http://hcrenewal.blogspot.com/2007/04/haunted-medical-literature-moffatt-and.html">said before</a>, ghost-writing is dangerous to health. It deludes physicians and patients into thinking health care products are more beneficial and less risky than they really are. Ghost-writing also undermines science by shifting the agenda away from interesting and important questions to questions whose answers may mainly benefit vested interests. Finally, on a personal note, ghost-writing demoralizes honest academics who must run their own studies, write their own papers, and manage the logistics of paper submission in competition with fake authors backed by corporate money and corporate staff. Scientists and academics who allow and front for ghost-writers ought to be ashamed of themselves. See also <a href="http://clinpsyc.blogspot.com/2009/06/greedy-and-ghostly-scientists.html">comments</a> in the Clinical Psychology and Psychiatry blog, and <a href="http://brodyhooked.blogspot.com/2009/06/lillys-off-label-marketing-of-zyprexa.html">discussion</a> of some of the other recent revelations about Zyprexa marketing in the Hooked: Ethics, Medicine and Pharma blog. ADDENDUM (14 June, 2009) - Also see <a href="http://www.margaretsoltan.com/?p=13876">comments</a> by Prof Margaret Soltan on the University Diary blog on the "Stockholm Syndrome" as manifested by "key opinion leaders" in the pay of health care corporations. ADDENDUM (15 June, 2009) - Furthermore, see <a href="http://brodyhooked.blogspot.com/2009/06/more-zyprexa-documents-released.html">comments</a> by Dr Howard Brody in the Hooked: Ethics, Medicine and Pharma Blog.

A Handbook for Ghost-Writing

We posted a number of times about questionable practices Eli Lilly used to market its atypical anti-psychotic drug Zyprexa (olanzapine). A p...

Đọc thêm »