The National Trial Lawyers
  • Home
    • Meet Our Team
    • Contact Us
    • Mission & Goals
    • FAQ
  • Webinars
  • News
  • Membership Directory
    • Top 100 Map – Civil Plaintiff
    • Top 100 Map – Criminal Defense
    • Top 40 Under 40 Map – Civil Plaintiff
    • Top 40 Under 40 Map – Criminal Defense
  • Top 100
    • Civil Plaintiff Officers / Executive Committee
    • Criminal Defense Officers / Executive Committee
    • Benefits
    • About
    • Top 100 Presidents Message
    • Diplomat
    • Membership Renewal
    • Member Profile Updates
    • Top 100 Badge
  • Top 40
    • Civil Plaintiff Officers / Executive Committee
    • Criminal Defense Officers / Executive Committee
    • Top 40 Under 40 Trial Academy Bootcamp
    • Benefits
    • About
    • Top 40 Presidents Message
    • Membership Renewal
    • Member Profile Updates
    • Top 40 Badge
  • Specialty Assoc
    • About
    • Shop
    • Officers
    • Membership Renewal
    • Member Profile Updates
  • Nominate
    • Top 100
    • Top 40
    • Specialty Association
    • Trial Lawyer Hall of Fame
    • Trial Lawyer of the Year
    • Trial Team of the Year
    • America’s Most Influential Trial Lawyer
    • America’s Most Influential Law Firm
    • Lifetime Achievement Award
  • Shop
  • Magazine
    • A-List
  • Education and Networking Agenda
    • Trial Lawyers Summit
    • Top 40 Under 40 Trial Academy Boot Camp
    • Mass Torts Made Perfect
    • The Lanier Trial Academy Master Class 6.0
    • The Business Of Law
    • Webinars
  • Hall of Fame
    • Trial Lawyer Hall of Fame

Pharmaceutical Companies Have First Amendment Marketing Rights for Off-Label Drug Use

Posted on August 28, 2015 by Eleanor Smith

 

Pharmaceutical Companies Have First Amendment Marketing Rights for Off-Label Drug UseThe US District Court for the Southern District of New York ruled that pharmaceutical companies are protected by the First Amendment when marketing drugs for off label use.

The Manhattan federal court’s decision will tremendously impact the way pharmaceutical manufacturers abide by Food and Drug Administration (FDA) restrictions.

The decision could inhibit the ability of the FDA to regulate this aspect of pharmaceutical marketing. While the decision is binding only in the district where it was handed down, the opinion does require that the off-label drug promotion not be misleading. However, this positive outcome of the ruling presents a new question (and potential problem): Who adjudicates whether unapproved drug uses are truthful?

Free Speech in Advertising

The preliminary ruling handed down in Manhattan resulted from a defensive move by pharmaceutical company Amarin. Although the FDA never had a problem with the materials Amarin wanted to use for marketing purposes, Amarin still views the lawsuit as a victory.

John Osborn, senior advisor to international law firm Hogan Lovells, said, “The long restrained, tightly controlled communication of scientific and medical information has been loosened.”

Amarin, a small pharmaceutical company in comparison to most, litigated on behalf of its fish oil product, Vascepa, which treats extremely high levels of certain fats (triglycerides) in the blood. This decision, however, carries implications for the entire future of prescription drugs in the United States.

Just last year, GlaxoSmithKline was ordered to pay a $105 million fine for off label drug promotion of its asthma and anti-depressant medications. The District Court’s ruling may impede such prosecutions against big pharmaceutical companies in the future. In addition, pharmaceutical companies creating innovative new off label uses for prescription drugs will face less restrictions in rolling out marketing for such products.

See Also: Arizona Court Revives Product Liability Case, Abolishes Learned Intermediary Doctrine

Telling the Truth

It is well known that doctors are allowed to use approved drugs in ways not explicitly provided for by the FDA, and such off label uses are extremely common. The US government, however, has long maintained the active promotion of such off label uses by pharmaceutical companies is illegal. Amarin plans to move forward with promotion of Vascepa for patients with somewhat lower levels of triglycerides, a use which the FDA has previously declined to approve.

Joel Kurtzberg, the attorney who represented Amarin, said, “This is the first decision, I think, that clearly and unequivocally rebuff’s the government’s view that off label promotion can be prosecuted, even if truthful and non-misleading.”

Judge Paul A. Engelmayer reconciled his decision with precedent in his opinion by writing, “The Court’s considered and firm view is that the FDA may not bring such an action based on truthful promotional speech alone, consistent with the First Amendment.”

In addition to the problem of what truthful interpretation means, some experts in the medical community are already vocalizing other concerns about the ruling. These potential risks include the fear that off label drug promotion will undermine the incentives for companies to complete the studies necessary to win approval for new disease medications. Manufacturers may present cherry-picked studies to clinicians that look good in isolation, but fail to present a balanced assessment of the full nature of risks involved with taking the medication.

The case is Amarin Pharma, Inc. V. United States Food & Drug Administration, Civil Action No. 1:15-cv-03588-PAE, United States District Court For The Southern District Of New York

Posted in Blog, Civil Rights, Consumer Protection

Comments are closed.

News Categories

Read about other Top Jury Verdicts

Walgreens Agrees to a $105 Million Shareholders Settlement

Walgreens Agrees to a $105 Million Shareholders Settlement

Walgreens Boots Alliance Inc (WBA.O) agreed to pay $105 million to settle a long-running class-action lawsuit accus[Read More...]
A Military Couple Reaches a $15 Million Settlement With Tripler Hospital Over Botched Delivery

A Military Couple Reaches a $15 Million Settlement With Tripler Hospital Over Botched Delivery

A federal judge in Hawaii has approved a $15 million settlement for an Army couple whose son suffered brain damage from lack [Read More...]
Defrauded College Students Will Have $6 Billion Forgiven in a New Settlement

Defrauded College Students Will Have $6 Billion Forgiven in a New Settlement

The Biden administration has agreed to cancel $6 billion in student loans for about 200,000 former students who say they were[Read More...]
An Iowa City Settles Lawsuit Over a Deadly Police Shooting For $5 Million

An Iowa City Settles Lawsuit Over a Deadly Police Shooting For $5 Million

Burlington, Iowa, has agreed to pay $5 million to settle a wrongful death lawsuit brought by the mother of a man who was shot[Read More...]
Co-Owners File a $695 Million Lawsuit Against Georgia Power Over a Contract Dispute

Co-Owners File a $695 Million Lawsuit Against Georgia Power Over a Contract Dispute

The owners of a majority share of a nuclear power plant being expanded in Georgia are suing lead owner Georgia Power Co., cla[Read More...]

#LegalNews

@@TheNTLtop100

Contact Us | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy

Attorney information and content provided on this website is provided for the benefit of members of The National Trial Lawyers and as a public service by Legal Associations Management, Inc. The website and all data are the property of Legal Associations Management, Inc. Data, including without limitation attorney information and content, on the site may not be mined, sold, or used commercially for any purpose without the explicit written consent of Legal Associations Management, Inc. This site may not be accessed by any automated program for extracting data for any use. By accessing and using the site you agree that you will not develop, support or use software, devices, scripts, robots, or any other means or processes (including crawlers, browser plug-ins and add-ons, or any other technology) to scrape data or otherwise copy profiles and other data. Unauthorized use or attempted unauthorized use of this system may subject you to both civil and criminal penalties.