Unauthorized Use of Content on this Site: 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 correspondence—are specifically intended to assist individuals navigating the PAAB preclearance system. Repurposing or reproducing this content, or using it for model training or any related purposes, is strictly prohibited without the express prior written consent of PAAB. This includes, but is not limited to, the use of such materials in automated systems, machine learning models, or artificial intelligence applications.
-
743 - Hi PAAB, I was wondering if expert guidelines for treatment option algorithms (first line, second line) are allowed to be included in branded pieces directed at HCPs. The goal would not be to compare treatments but to see under which situations / for what patients a therapy would be preferred. (Patient profile?) Thanks for your help!
• Jennifer Carroll -
708 - If Product-A is a combination of Drug-B and Drug-C, can the mechanism of action information from the Drug-B and Drug-C Product Monographs be used in Product-A advertising? The Product Monographs for combination products usually contain less information regarding their components (for brevity), however mechanisms of action should be identical regardless of formulation.
• Jennifer Carroll -
704 - If a product has two possible dosing schedules, with no specific requirements/recommendations on which HCPs can choose, are we permitted to just focus on one dosing schedule in APS? If both dosing schedules are required, are we permitted to focus on one over the other in terms of prominence?
• Jennifer Carroll -
689 - Non branded APS I just read the following Ask PAAB questions and I require clarification: Are we required to send material on disease awareness to the PAAB, even if there is no product mention? Hide Answer [-] PAAB Code section covers editorial pieces generated by a pharmaceutical company. That means the piece would not exist without the pharma company's financial involvement. The PAAB reviews editorial pieces where healthcare products are mentioned. See Code s7.8. Therefore, if you are talking about mechanism of action of how a ...
• Jennifer Carroll -
677 - We have a situation where previously-approved clinical data in our TMA has been removed. This was an editorial request from Health Canada, simply to make room for new content (as Health Canada often requests trade-offs in order to keep TMAs succinct). It does not reflect a change in approval of the data itself. Therefore, can you advise if this previously-approved TMA data can continue to be used in APS? Note, the data does not appear in published studies and is therefore considered Data on File.
• Jennifer Carroll -
674 - Is it acceptable to compare the clinical trial inclusion/exclusion criteria among competitor products? We would like to make the point that patients with certain conditions were included in the trials for 1 product but not in trials for its competitors. I understand non-clinical information can be compared across products, and we wondered if inclusion/exclusion info was considered clinical or non-clinical. Could this be done in a branded context?
• Jennifer Carroll -
671 - It seems that materials that cite a product is available through the Special Access Program would be considered promotional. Are these types of materials reviewed and approved by PAAB, or are they strictly prohibited as alluded to in the Health Canada Guidance regarding special access programs? Without some notice, I don’t know how healthcare professionals know whether a product is available through SAP.
• Jennifer Carroll -
665 - We would like to produce a non-branded APS that highlights the current medical practice on using a specific class of medication. The most recent Canadian consensus guidelines (updated in 2017) support the message that this class of medication should now be offered as an option to patients undergoing continued maintenance treatment (this is a big change vs the last consensus guidelines publication from 2003). 2 Questions: 1) We assume it would be acceptable to make a claim in an APS that outlines this recommendation, given that this is from an approved, authoritative source, correct? 2) This guideline document also provides context around why their position has changed. They provide details about how this class of medication was used historically, and also outline some of the evidence that supports their new recommendation...
• Jennifer Carroll