Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

Forum

  1. Home
  2. PAAB Q&A
  3. PM comparisons of warnings & precautions
PAAB Notice
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.

PM comparisons of warnings & precautions

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved PAAB Q&A
3 Posts 2 Posters 409 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • K Offline
    K Offline
    karen.taylor
    wrote on last edited by
    #1

    Our client would like to develop a tool that presents a text based side-by-side comparison from two product TMAs on instructions for use limitations (i.e. warnings & precautions). We understand that we have to make the comparisons representative of the section of the TMA that it is based on and not selective to which attributes are included, but a piece that presents the entire warnings & precautions section for each drug would be extremely long. We’re aiming to understand if we can make comparisons of just specific sub-sections of the W&P section (for example a sub-section under a “Cardiovascular” subheading, and then be complete about covering everything within that particular section for both products), versus having to include the entire W&P section?

    We would, of course, ensure that a disclaimer is included that denotes that clinical significant is not implied, and that there is no heading that implies an overall comparison of safety.

    Jennifer CarrollJ 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • K karen.taylor

      Our client would like to develop a tool that presents a text based side-by-side comparison from two product TMAs on instructions for use limitations (i.e. warnings & precautions). We understand that we have to make the comparisons representative of the section of the TMA that it is based on and not selective to which attributes are included, but a piece that presents the entire warnings & precautions section for each drug would be extremely long. We’re aiming to understand if we can make comparisons of just specific sub-sections of the W&P section (for example a sub-section under a “Cardiovascular” subheading, and then be complete about covering everything within that particular section for both products), versus having to include the entire W&P section?

      We would, of course, ensure that a disclaimer is included that denotes that clinical significant is not implied, and that there is no heading that implies an overall comparison of safety.

      Jennifer CarrollJ Offline
      Jennifer CarrollJ Offline
      Jennifer Carroll
      wrote on last edited by Jennifer Carroll
      #2

      Hey @karen-taylor

      Side-by-side presentations of warning and precautions across two or more product monographs should be a complete presentation of the entire section so as not to be selective, unbalanced or incomplete. Focusing on a subset of the warnings is essentially a safety comparison and safety comparisons are not permitted across monographs. They require head-to-head RCTs per s5.7.

      The way you make the presentation in question (warning and precautions across product monographs) something that can be considered, is by making it a complete comparison of the section of the PM.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • K Offline
        K Offline
        karen.taylor
        wrote on last edited by
        #3

        Thanks @Jennifer-Carroll!

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        Reply
        • Reply as topic
        Log in to reply
        • Oldest to Newest
        • Newest to Oldest
        • Most Votes


        • Login

        • Don't have an account? Register

        • Login or register to search.
        • First post
          Last post
        0
        • Categories
        • Recent
        • Tags
        • Popular
        • Users
        • Groups