Skip to content
Brand Logo

Forum
The responses, guidance, and advisories provided by the Pharmaceutical Advertising Advisory Board (PAAB), including but not limited to those available through the PAAB Forum, the PAAB website, and any PAAB correspondences, are specifically intended to assist individuals navigating the PAAB preclearance system. Repurposing or reproducing this content without written consent from the PAAB Commissioner is strictly prohibited. This prohibition includes, but is not limited to, use in machine learning or AI models.

  • Announcements regarding our community

    3 3
    3 Topics
    3 Posts
    D
    Did you know? Manufacturer eFiles users have expanded permissions! In response to feedback received by manufacturers, we expanded permissions for manufacturer user and manufacturer admin user accounts in 2023. For all eFiles permissions, including client account permissions, please see PAAB : Resources : Do you know what your eFiles account can do for you?. If you regularly work within eFiles with a manufacturer user or manufacturer admin account, rest assured, nothing is changing in your day-to-day experience. If you currently do not have an eFiles account, we encourage you to register for greater transparency into the eFiles process. @Manufacturer

  • A place to talk about whatever you want

    4 10
    4 Topics
    10 Posts
    M
    Hello! According to PAAB code 3 Making Statements: Claims, Quotes & References | 3.1.1: “Clinical or therapeutic claims must be based on published, peer-reviewed, controlled, and well-designed studies with clinical and statistical significance clearly indicated. Review articles, pooled data, meta-analysis, post-hoc analysis, are generally regarded as not being acceptable evidence in drug advertising. Data included in the TMA may be acceptable. Additionally, high quality meta-analysis and observational studies may be acceptable. Non-clinical claims must be well supported by relevant evidence.” Can you please advise when/ in what circumstances a post-hoc analysis would be considered acceptable? Appreciate any insights/guidance that can be shared.

  • Got a question? Ask away!

    1 2
    1 Topics
    2 Posts
    Jennifer CarrollJ
    Hey @mhouzer The difference between the Standard 4-day initial review of RMTs and submitting as an ARO-4 is that the subsequent revision turnaround time will be an expedited 2-days rather than the standard 3-days. If you anticipate needing a few rounds of back and forth, this can be a good option to get to your final letter more quickly.

  • Blog posts from individual members

    0 0
    0 Topics
    0 Posts
    Jennifer CarrollJ
    Good Morning @Manufacturer and @Agency Hope everyone is staying warm and enjoying the ️. The PAAB Quarterly Tag and CEI Reports have been updated to contain data for Q4. See the Tag report here and the CEI report here. The Forum Quarterly Review for Q4 has also been posted. These wrap up 2024! Thank you for another great year of collaboration and compliance. We hope to continue working with you in 2025 Thank you PAAB

  • Have questions about how to use the forum, set up your account, functionality etc.? Ask them here and we'll help you out.

    3 3
    3 Topics
    3 Posts
    D
    Lets start with a quick registration video.

  • Do you have questions about particular sections of the PAAB code? Do you have insights on how sections of the code be improved? Do you want to share insights about how related standards are addressed in other jurisdictions? Post here.

    81 189
    81 Topics
    189 Posts
    M
    Hi @Jennifer-Carroll , thank you so much for confirming!

  • 127 225
    127 Topics
    225 Posts
    Jennifer CarrollJ
    Hi tk2022 Please see our more recent “Guidance on Real World Evidence/Data” for criteria and direction on the presentation of RWE in advertising to health care professionals. Please also see our "Guidance on the use of the Attention Icon" regarding unblinded data.

  • 1k 2k
    1k Topics
    2k Posts
    Jennifer CarrollJ
    Hey @HollyMed Yes, per the copy "In the scenario described above where guidelines lower in the aforementioned hierarchy are being used over the available US guidelines, evidence must be provided to support that these guidelines are a true reflection of Canadian practice". Note that there may be instances where we ask for more information about US guidelines. This is extremely rare and the rationale is disclosed during the review process. If you find yourself in this rare instance, please reach out to the reviewer for clarification.