Navigation

    Forum

    • Register
    • Login
    • Search
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups

    662 - Hi Patrick, I have the following question: When using the terms "proven efficacy" in a headline in the context of what the product is indicated for, why do we need high level fair balance? For example, "Product X has proven efficacy in the treatment of Arthritis." If the product has received an indication for the treatment of arthritis, it has been shown to be effective - otherwise it would not have received such an indication. So, this headline is simply a factual statement, as opposed to a clinical claim. Thanks in advance for your clarification.

    Disclosure requirements: PI & Safety Information, Federal schedule, study parameters, reference lists
    1
    1
    129
    Loading More Posts
    • 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.
    • Jennifer Carroll
      Jennifer Carroll last edited by

      Although the indication is the evidentiary basis for a claim such as “Proven efficacy”, the statements, “Indicated in condition X” and “Proven efficacy in condition X”, are not equivalent. The message “Indicated in condition X” is a legal statement setting the parameters around marketing and clinical use. As such, lowest level fair balance is sufficient. The statement “Proven efficacy in condition X” is not a simple legal statement; it is a therapeutic claim. In HCP advertising, APS containing therapeutic claims (e.g. efficacy, effectiveness, safety, tolerability) are required to disclose the highest level of fair balance.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • First post
        Last post