Forum Update: Supporting Community-Led Discussion
The forum was created as a space for shared learning and peer support, and as the community grows, we want to lean more fully into that purpose.
Going forward, PAAB will be taking a more listening-first role in forum discussions. Rather than responding immediately to every question, we’ll be encouraging members to engage with one another, share experiences, and help build collective understanding. PAAB will continue to monitor conversations and will step in to:
- Correct any misunderstandings
- Provide guidance when questions remain unanswered after a few days
- Support discussions where official clarification is needed
Our goal is to foster a collaborative, trusted community where knowledge is shared and strengthened by everyone’s contributions.
Thank you for being part of the conversation.
Mention of positive LOI with pCPA
-
Is it permissible to include a callout in a branded APS that simply mentions a positive LOI with pCPA for a particular indication, once that agreement has been publicized? Appropriate balance information would be included.
-
Is it permissible to include a callout in a branded APS that simply mentions a positive LOI with pCPA for a particular indication, once that agreement has been publicized? Appropriate balance information would be included.
Hello @karen-taylor
Please see the response to Q&A Email update on CADTH recommendations. The letter of intent (LOI) is viewed similarly to the CADTH recommendation. It is not acceptable to position the pan-Canadian Pharmaceutical Alliance (pCPA) coverage negotiations as a positive feature of the product or suggest endorsement. Formulary messages should be restricted to clear, complete coverage criteria and not suggest the endorsement of a product.
