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.
581 - For an efficacy claim, comparing head-to-head results of the study drug vs. the standard treatment, what support is required to justify the claim "significant"?
-
For “statistically significant” you need a statistically significant p-value or CI. On occasion, multiplicity adjustments are required to control for type I error.
For “clinically significant” you’d need the study to have predefined a threshold difference that is deemed to be “clinically significant”. The message “significant” on it’s own is ambiguous, “statistically” or “clinically” should be added as supported.
