One company seeks to negotiate a settlement with the several states over opioid marketing, while Vermont investigates violations of its gift ban regulation…in this edition of Compliance News in Review.

Will Purdue Pharma go for the Hail Mary? Is Vermont about to throw a flag for gift ban violations? Is there a new way to offset bribery penalties? Will there be a third down push from the OPDP? We address these questions and more, in this edition of the Compliance News in Review.

In the words of Max from Where the Wild Things Are, “let the wild rumpus start.” No, not the holiday shopping frenzy (although that certainly applies), but the college football conference championships! Championship weekend is upon us and with it, the fight for a position in the playoffs. So far, the season has had its share of twists and turns, and the conference championships should provide additional drama. It all ends with the selection of the four playoff teams on December 3rd. To help fill the time to kickoff, we offer “X’s” and “O’s” of our own, in this edition of the Compliance News in Review.

Has Purdue Pharma huddled up with several state attorneys general? According to people familiar with the situation, the company has reached out to the states to gauge their interest in a global settlement related to its opioid drug. Currently, a consortium of 41 state attorneys general are investigating several opioid manufacturers’ marketing and sales practices. While Purdue is not authorized to represent other opioid makers, those familiar with the situation say the company is seeking an agreement that would cover all states’ lawsuits against all opioid manufacturers.

Vermont is calling for a review. The Vermont attorney general is investigating possible violations of the state’s gift to healthcare professionals ban according to a source familiar with the matter. The state law bans the provision of most items of value to healthcare providers. However, Open Payment data shows that physicians are receiving gifts, travel, and other banned transfers of value.

Companies that cooperate in FCPA investigations will now score big points with the Department of Justice. The agency will now consider foregoing criminal charges when a company self-reports. If a company cooperates with prosecutors, fixes the issue that led to the investigation, and helps investigators find the individuals responsible for the misconduct, the DOJ will presume the issue can be resolved without criminal charges. Any profits received from the misconduct will still need to be forfeited. Companies that do not voluntarily report possible FCPA violations may still be eligible for some leniency if they cooperate with investigators.

The Office of Prescription Drug Promotion has issued its third violation letter for 2017. A warning letter was issued to Amherst Pharmaceuticals and Magna Pharmaceuticals over promotional statements related to an insomnia drug. The OPDP cited false or misleading information about the risks and efficacy of the drug found on a product webpage and an exhibit panel. The letter also stated that the companies failed to submit the webpage and exhibit panels to the FDA prior to them being first used, as is required. Magna Pharmaceuticals says it will correct the exhibit panels and make sure all materials in the marketplace are correct. Amherst Pharmaceuticals was cited for information on the product webpage, but sold the insomnia drug to Magna in May.

With that news from the OPDP, the clock is winding down on this conference championship edition of the Compliance News in Review. If you’ve got a Dawg (how’s that for a hint as to who we will be pulling for?) in the fight in this weekend’s conference championships, we wish you luck (unless of course, your “Dawg” is a Tiger). Good luck to your favorite team or alma mater and we’ll see you here for the next edition.

Thanks for reading!

Friday the 13th Brings Multiple Settlements for One Unlucky Company

CMS posts new Open Payments thresholds, MedTech Europe revises its Code, California deals with two new pharmaceutical laws, and multiple settlements are announced for one “unlucky” pharmaceutical company…in this Friday the 13th edition of the Compliance News in Review.

Be careful what you wish for, Freaky Friday (a.k.a. Friday the 13th) has arrived. Steer clear of those sidewalk cracks, black cats, and broken mirrors! We prefer to focus more on the “Friday” part of the date stamp rather than the “13th.” Whether you’re working for the weekend, or just counting down the minutes until it officially begins, we offer the latest edition of the Compliance News in Review to help you whittle away the hours until the superstitions have subsided.

Change doesn’t have to always be scary. MedTech Europe, a joint venture of EucoMed and European Diagnostic Manufacturers Association, changed its Code of Ethical Business Practice. Changes include the phasing out of direct sponsorship for HCPs to attend medical conferences; enhanced transparency of educational grants; and new guidelines for demonstration products and samples. In addition, starting in 2018, members will only be able to provide educational grant support for meetings that have been vetted by the organization.

The “lucky” numbers for the Open Payments reporting thresholds for 2018 have been posted by CMS. The small payments, or de minimis threshold, was raised to $10.49, and the annual aggregate threshold was raised to $104.90.

California passed two new laws affecting the pharmaceutical industry. First, SB 17 requires health plans and insurers to report information about drug pricing. The information will be compiled into a report showing how drug pricing effects health insurance premiums. The law also requires drug manufacturers to notify purchasers 90 days in advance if a drug’s wholesale acquisition cost (WAC) is going to increase.

AB 265 prohibits prescription drug manufacturers from offering assistance to lower out of pocket costs, if a lower-cost generic equivalent drug is available. Exceptions include the discounts required under an FDA Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS); single-tablet drug regimens for the treatment of HIV or AIDS that are as effective as a multi-tablet regimen; and completion of step therapy or prior authorization requirements for a branded drug, as mandated by the individual’s health coverage.

Time to start throwing copious amounts of salt over the shoulder at Aegerion. The company pled guilty and pay over $35 million to settle criminal and civil charges that it violated the FDCA, HIPAA, and the False Claims Act. According to the Department of Justice, Aegerion did not follow the proper Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy when educating prescribers about the rare cholesterol condition its drug was approved to treat. The government also claimed the company filed a misleading REMS report and promoted the drug for the general treatment of high cholesterol, all in violation of the FDCA.

Aegerion also resolved civil charges it violated the False Claims Act. The company allegedly shared misleading information about its drug, altered or falsified statements of medical necessity or prior authorization to federal healthcare programs, and defrayed the copay obligations of patients in federal healthcare programs, which is a violation of the Anti-Kickback Statute.

Following the settlement, the patient assistance organization involved, Patient Services, Inc. (PSI), acknowledged it received a subpoena from the DOJ. PSI said it had cooperated with the government in the case. The organization said it operates “under guidelines set by the U.S. Health and Human Services Office of the Inspector General and does not funnel funds for manufacturers.”

Some “strange magic” leads to a $13 million FCPA settlement for Alere to resolve charges it violated the FCPA. The company allegedly paid bribes to meet its revenue targets. According to the SEC, company subsidiaries in India and Colombia used distributors or consultants to make improper payments to foreign officials. The agency said the company failed to maintain adequate internal controls to prevent the payments and recorded the payments incorrectly.

With that, we close out this superstitious edition of the Compliance News in Review. Thanks for reading! Stay safe out there as you navigate the potholes and pitfalls that allegedly lurk in shadows, and no matter what, don’t walk under that ladder!

Compliance News in Review, September 22, 2017

Reprimands in the UK, opioid manufacturers face another investigatory group, and registration processes for Nevada representatives, all in this week’s Compliance News in Review.

Ready or not, Fall is here! Leaves are turning, football is back, the oppressive heat of Summer is fading, and pumpkin spice everything is available. We are certainly fans of Autumn here in the offices of the News in Review and we’re ready to break out the flannel shirts, boots, and maybe a knit cap to enjoy the cooler evenings ahead. We are also fans of compliance! So, grab a pumpkin spice latte and settle in to this edition of the Compliance News in Review.

A nip in the air, and a nip at the marketing practices of several companies by the ABPI. The industry organization reprimanded Pfizer, Novartis, Astellas UK, Astellas Europe, and TOR Generics for breaches of its Code. Pfizer and Novartis were both cited for misleading promotion, and unclear materials used by representatives. Astellas UK and Astellas Europe voluntarily admitted that prescribing information for several of their products omitted references to adverse events. Lastly, TOR Generics was accused of promoting an unlicensed product, which was expected to be a prescription-only product, in a public magazine.

A new team is investigating opioid marketing. 41 state attorneys general formed a coalition to investigate opioid manufacturers and distributors. The group subpoenaed several top manufacturers, and wholesale distributors Amerisource, Cardinal, and McKesson. The AGs want to know if manufacturers deceived healthcare professionals about product efficacy and addictiveness.

Time to turn over a new leaf in Nevada. The state published draft procedures for the registration of pharmaceutical representatives. Individuals who work in Nevada for at least five days a year and communicate with healthcare professionals, or participate in the activities listed below, must register with the state’s Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS):

  • Marketing of prescription drugs to healthcare providers, pharmacists or pharmacy employees, and employees of medical facilities
  • Meeting with healthcare providers to answer questions about product use and benefits, or to provide discussion and product information and resources to those providers or other decision makers while representing the manufacturer or supporting promotional efforts of the manufacturer
  • Distributing FDA regulated product samples and product information

These activities are excluded under the law:

  • Attending a conference in Nevada that is not exclusively marketed to Nevada healthcare professionals
  • Activities related to clinical trials, investigational drugs, or Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies
  • Activities performed by wholesale distributors who do not represent a single manufacturer

Companies are required to notify DHHS as employees are hired and terminated, and employees must be registered with DHHS within 30 days of hire.

With that, we wrap up this edition of the Compliance News in Review and head outback to roast marshmallows and make smores! If you can’t join us by the fire pit, we’ll catch you back here for our next issue.

Thanks for reading!

Compliance News in Review, July 31, 2017

A whistleblower settlement, the effect of a recent cyberattack on one company’s drug supply, transparency in Ontario, and the growth of CME, all served for your approval in this edition of the Compliance News in Review.

It is the quintessential American food, even if it didn’t originate here; it’s the hamburger. Nothing beats a good burger, even during the hot dog days of summer (see what we did there?). The tasty entrée even inspired the bard of gulf and western music, Jimmy Buffet, to write a song extoling its virtues. So, how do you like your burger? With slaw? Kraut? Chili? Our mouths are watering just pondering the possibilities! Before we fire up the grill here at the News in Review World Headquarters, we’ll serve a tasty treat of a different flavor – the latest edition of the Compliance News in Review.

This is hardly minced meat. Celgene has agreed to pay $280 million to settle claims in a whistleblower suit that accused the company of promoting two of its cancer products for off-label purposes. The whistleblower, a former employee, claims the company directly marketed the drugs for the off-label uses and hid risks of blood clots from physicians. Celgene did not admit to wrongdoing in the settlement.

Still in a bit of pickle following the Petya cyberattack, Merck has warned that some drug supplies may be disrupted as it continues to rebound from the attack. The company’s R&D and manufacturing operations have not yet fully recovered and there may be temporary delays in filling orders for some products.

Ontario doctors may be flipping over a recent judicial decision that will allow the payments they receive from the government insurance program to be published. The Toronto Star filed a Freedom of Information Act request to obtain the names of the top 100 billers. The Ontario Health Ministry refused to provide the names, saying it would be an invasion of privacy. Two doctor groups and the Ontario Medical Association also fought the release of names, arguing that doing so “accomplishes nothing other than naming and shaming.” The judges disagreed, saying the “public is entitled to information in the possession of their governments so that the public may, among other things, hold their governments accountable.”

The Accreditation Council of Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) 2016 report on the growth of CME finds an increase in the number of events (7%), as well as an increase in the number of instructional hours (9%). The study also shows the number of activities and interactions has increased steadily since 2010. ACCME President and CEO, Dr. Graham McMahon, noted that there are currently more than 3,000 hours of CME available to healthcare providers.

That brings us to the end of another “well done” edition of the Compliance News in Review. We’ll see you right back here for the next summertime treatise, and in the meantime, we leave you with a few tips for barbecuing the perfect burger (olive oil…who knew?).

Have a great week!

Compliance News in Review, June 13, 2017

States with new laws, lawsuits and more; HHS says drug pricing is a top issue; the AMA takes aim at DTC ads again; and transparency efforts and more from Europe…all in this edition of the Compliance News in Review.

The magic, mystery, and “monstering” of the summer movies season is in full swing! From super-heroes to lush gothic tales, there’s something for everyone this summer. There’s nothing like escaping to the theater on a rainy summer day. Can’t you just smell the popcorn and taste the Milk Duds? Before you head off to take in the latest blockbuster or art house feature, silence your cell phone and enjoy this screening of the latest edition of the Compliance News in Review.

We begin with a trilogy of compelling releases. The Nevada legislature passed a bill that would have required makers of diabetes drugs to report drug pricing information to the State. The bill was forwarded to the governor, who promptly vetoed it. Undaunted, State senators revised the bill; removing the requirements to which the governor objected and adding provisions that apply to all drug manufacturers. It was passed, and in an ending fit for Hollywood, the governor has said he is “proud to sign” the new bill. The law will require manufacturers to report pricing for diabetes drugs, and all manufacturers must now supply a list of sales representatives who work in the State. Additionally, all transfers of value from Nevada sales representative to HCPs must be reported each year, including those to mid-level practitioners and office staff.

It’s a wrap on a new law concerning generic drug pricing in Maryland. Generic drug makers will now be fined when a price increase causes a product’s wholesale acquisition price (WAC) to increase by more than 50% in one year, or if the drug’s WAC is greater than $80. Maryland’s expressed concern that the bill did not address the cost of patented drugs and devices, and that it may result in citizens not having access to some generic drugs. Concerns aside, the governor did not veto the bill. The law will go into effect October 1.

The Washington D.C. Department of Health has posted several FAQs related to AccessRx. The FAQs cover a variety of issues including reporting timelines, advertising expenses, and gift reporting.

HHS Secretary, Dr. Tom Price, says drug pricing is a coming attraction for the agency. In testimony before the senate budget committee, Price said the president has directed him to develop proposals to lower drug costs. He also said meetings with stakeholders have already taken place.

This attraction is rated “P” for pricing. At the AMA’s annual meeting, the group will consider a proposal urging drug manufacturers to list drug prices in DTC ads. The proposal was introduced by several New England medical societies, and advocates who have been pushing federal agencies, such as the Federal Trade Commission and the FDA, to compel drug companies to include retail pricing information in DTC ads. The proposal will need to be approved by the American Medical Association’s House of Delegates before being presented to the larger body.

From the foreign film division, a story of transparency. German doctors will be able to voluntarily disclose payments they receive from drug companies in a database managed by the non-profit journalism group, Correctiv. According to a study conducted by Correctiv, 71,000 German doctors received 575 million Euros worth of payments from the industry last year. The study also found that only 29% of doctors were willing to have their payment information published.

Two companies have been publicly reprimanded for breaches of the ABPI Code of Practice. In one case, a media agency published the work it did for the company to promote the agency’s creative capabilities. The work was out-of-date and no longer accurate. Even though the company did not give the agency permission to publish the work, and voluntarily reported the incident, it was found to have violated Clause 2 of the Code of Practice; bringing discredit upon and reducing confidence in the industry. In the other breach, another company was reprimanded for distributing a patient support leaflet with inaccurate and misleading information. The company was asked to issue a corrective statement to the healthcare providers who had already received the leaflet.

The last story is a good reminder of the importance of making sure your compliance training extends to vendors and other third parties. In bribery cases, we see the damage that can be caused when third parties run afoul of laws and regulations. Vendors and other third parties need to be evaluated for the risk associated with their services and targeted training should be provided based on that risk.

With that, we roll the closing credits on this edition of the Compliance News in the Review. Thanks for reading. We’ll see you at the movies!

Compliance News in “Preview”

As we wistfully wish 2016 a fond farewell, we welcome 2017 and wonder what compliance surprises, developments, and news the year might hold. What will be the hot topics debated around the water cooler in your office? The team at the Compliance News in Review has dusted off its crystal ball once again and we offer a few suggestions on what we see as the hot topics for 2017.

Drug Pricing Transparency

Drug pricing was at the top of the list in 2016. CEOs were brought before Congressional panels to explain exorbitant price hikes, and in several states, laws were proposed that will companies to disclose factors related to drug pricing for certain drugs. Vermont was the only state to pass such legislation, but California has reintroduced the bill for this session. The federal government also got in on the act with a bipartisan bill introduced in the Senate. While some of the fervor has quieted, we don’t think we’ve heard the last of pricing transparency. The passage of Vermont’s law could be the catalyst other states need to get their own laws passed.

Off-label Guidance/Revised Regulations

We don’t expect to see new guidance or regulations in 2017, but the FDA did at least start a conversation with the industry in 2016. A two-day meeting with stakeholders in November resulted in a list of diverse statements and opinions from companies, the medical community, and patient groups. The meeting with stakeholders was a step in the right direction, but a few high-profile cases (Caronia, Amarin, and Pacira) that resulted in wins for the industry, only led to more confusion and questions. We are cautiously optimistic that the FDA will at least continue the conversation and somewhat clarify the regulations.

Warning Letters and Notice of Violation Letters

The FDA’s Office of Prescription Drug Promotion (OPDP) wasn’t very active in 2016…until December, that is. At the end of the year, the agency made up for lost time by sending six letters for non-compliance with drug promotion regulations, signaling (in our humble opinion) a more aggressive approach in 2017. Most of the letters that were sent in December were related to the use of digital media.

Bribery and Corruption Enforcement

In 2016, several companies settled with the Department of Justice over Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) violations. Most notable was a $500 million plus settlement with Teva that occurred near the end of the year. We expect to see more settlements this year, with half a dozen life sciences companies already under investigation for FCPA violations, according to the most recent Corporate Investigations List on the FCPA Blog. One wonders if the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) will join the trend as well and pursue more UK Bribery Act cases now that the agency has dipped its feet into the pool of U.S.-style Deferred Prosecution Agreements. We wouldn’t be surprised to see SFO dive right into the deep end.

The 2017 year in life sciences compliance looks to be an interesting one, and we’ll be tracking the news and headlines through our Compliance News in Review updates. Don’t forget to “follow” our blog so you don’t miss any news or our tips and best practices for building and deploying the compliance training you need to reduce risk and strengthen your compliance culture.

Thanks for reading and best wishes for a compliant and successful 2017!

Compliance News in Review: the 2016 Year-End Summary

Here we are again. Another 584 million-mile (940 million km for our metric friends) trip around the sun is nearly complete. It seems like just yesterday we were celebrating the beginning of 2016 and now we’re picking out our favorite brand of champagne to celebrate its end. Before we break out the noisemakers and party favors, let’s take one last nostalgic look back at some of the life sciences compliance-related developments of 2016.

A new milestone was reached regarding HCP spend disclosure. The first disclosure reports under the EFPIA Disclosure Code were released in 2016. Gaining disclosure authorization from individual HCPs proved to be a challenge for the industry and the numbers of doctors who granted authorization ranged widely between countries. According to Britain’s pharmaceutical trade association, ABPI, 70% of their HCPs granted authorization and in Ireland, just over half of HCPs did so. In other transparency developments, ten of Canada’s top drug firms announced plans to voluntarily disclose aggregate physician and healthcare organization payment data. The movement was started by GSK Canada, and other multinational firms including Abbvie, Purdue, BMS, and Lilly followed.

Drug pricing was a big story in 2016. Former CEOs from Turing and Valeant were called to testify before Congress about drug price hikes, and Mylan’s CEO was called to testify over dramatic increases in the cost of an EpiPen. Laws that would require drug companies to disclose information about their pricing decisions were proposed in several states, and a bill was introduced at the federal level with similar requirements. Even with those high profile stories making headlines, only one pricing disclosure law successfully passed this year – Vermont. That law requires a select group of manufacturers to provide information about the factors related to price increases.

A handful of former Insys employees had an eventful year. A former sales representative entered a guilty plea to charges of fraud, and a district sales manager and a several of top executives were all arrested on charges they paid kickbacks to doctors. The drug at the center of the charges is the opioid painkiller, fentanyl. Prosecutors and enforcement agencies claim the individuals offered a variety of kickbacks to doctors to increase prescriptions and encouraged them to prescribe it for unapproved uses.

2016 was an active year for settlements related to bribery cases. GSK, AstraZeneca, SciClone, and Novartis all entered into settlements with the SEC over activities conducted by subsidiaries in China. Orthofix and Teva both set aside cash in anticipation of resolving the FCPA-related charges. Olympus entered into a $22.8 million settlement with the DOJ to resolve charges that a subsidiary covering Latin America paid bribes to healthcare professionals working in government facilities in order to increase sales of product.

We saw a couple of legal “victories” for the industry in the debate over sharing truthful off-label information. In the Amarin case, the FDA decided not to appeal a judge’s decision that allowed the company to share truthful off-label information about its fish oil product. In addition, in proposed jury instructions for a medical device case, the DOJ indicated that it is “not a crime for a device company or its representatives to give doctors wholly truthful and non-misleading information about the unapproved use of a device.”

With a string of legal decisions favoring the industry, the FDA held a public forum in November concerning the ability of drug and device makers to share off-label information. The primary topic was whether the agency needs to revise its regulations considering recent legal decisions and the forum was attended by various stakeholders representing both sides of the argument.

With that, we complete our look back at 2016 and the stories that made headlines in the world of life science compliance. It was an eventful year, and everyone at the Compliance News in Review is excited to see what the new year holds. Thanks for joining us throughout the year and best wishes for a happy, healthy, and compliant 2017!

Compliance News in Review, October 14, 2016

Ghouls, goblins and ghosts galore…the haunting season is here! Enjoy it while you can, before you know it, reindeer, snowmen, and gingerbread men will be scattered across the landscapes. (Poor Thanksgiving…it gets no respect!) No tricks from us though, just treats. And by treats we mean delicious bites of news! So before you head out to wait for the Great Pumpkin, join us for this not-so-scary edition of the Compliance News in Review.

The FDA has carved out time for a public hearing on November 9th and 10th to discuss the subject of communicating off-label uses of drugs and devices. The agency hopes to hear from a variety of stakeholders, including industry representatives, healthcare professionals, patients, and research institutions. Approximately 30 topics will be discussed, ranging from the effect that increased communications will have on patient enrollment in clinical trials to how patients should be made aware that they are receiving information about an off-label use.

GSK is feeling a bit of a chill in the air. The company reached an agreement with the SEC to pay $20 million to resolve FCPA-related charges its Chinese subsidiary paid bribes to increase sales. As part of the settlement, GSK is also required to provide the SEC with reports regarding its implementation of anticorruption measures for the next two years.

Dermatologists are receiving lots of treats from the industry. A study of 2014 Open Payments data reveals that nearly three-quarters of the country’s dermatologists received payments in 2014. Most were under $50.00, but a few of the doctors received payments totaling more than $90,000.00. The study appears in JAMA Dermatology.

These are frightful times at Mylan as the company agrees to pay $465 million to settle claims it overcharged Medicaid for EpiPen. The company has come under intense fire for its pricing practices related to the product. In agreeing to the settlement, Mylan did not admit to wrongdoing.

The news of the FDA’s public hearing on communication related to the unapproved uses of drugs and devices is encouraging. Hopefully, after the forum, the agency will move quickly on the release of new guidance. As court decisions are discussed in the media and more public hearings are announced, now is a great time to reinforce appropriate promotional communication through the release of updated training.

With that, we close our autumnal edition of the Compliance News in Review. One final note – if you’re attending the Pharmaceutical and Medical Device Compliance Congress next week, stop by Booth 404 in the exhibit hall and say “boo!”

Thanks for reading and stay compliant!

Compliance News in Review, September 15, 2016

Illinois tackles illegal drug promotion by Insys; the ABPI calls out two member companies for breaking promotion rules; the Australian legislature shines a light on corporate crime and Medicines Australia reports on payments to doctors; and AstraZeneca settles with the SEC…all in this edition of the Compliance News in Review.

You had to know it wasn’t far away when “pumpkin spice everything” started appearing on store shelves. After the long hot summer, the staff here at the Compliance News in Review couldn’t be more excited that football is back, and cooler days with it (hopefully). Whether you’re a fan of college, or the league where they play for pay, the season is short, but that’s what makes it so special. Yes. football is now our focus, but not so much that we won’t continue to provide you with all the life sciences compliance news fit to blog. So, strike up the band, we’re ready to take the field on this edition of the Compliance News in Review.

The Illinois Attorney General is lining up against Insys. The state has filed suit against the company for illegal marketing of its fentanyl drug. The drug is approved for treating pain in cancer patients, but the AG alleges the company has been marketing the drug for treatment of other types of pain. The company also encouraged doctors to write prescriptions for higher, more expensive doses of its product, despite FDA recommendations to use the lowest dose of opioids possible, according to the suit.

The Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry (ABPI) threw a flag on Hospira and Napp Pharmaceuticals. The organization has accused the companies of breaking the rules regarding promotion of biosimilars. An investigation found that Napp Pharmaceuticals made inappropriate payments to physicians attending a meeting that was deemed an advisory board. Hospira allegedly invited U.K. doctors to attend a meeting outside the U.K., which was a not a genuine advisory board, where their drug was promoted.

The Australian legislature will huddle about the state of its anticorruption law. After two Australian companies were implicated in a case involving the bribery of foreign officials, a member of the Australian senate decided to relaunch a committee to address corporate corruption. The mission of the committee is to improve Australia’s response to corporate crime and the senator noted that compared to bribery laws in the U.S. and U.K., Australia’s law is inadequate.

The “score” regarding industry payments to physicians in Australia has been posted for public review. Between October 2015 and April 2016 doctors received $8.5 million from industry according to a report from Medicines Australia. The organization says this report provides patients with more information than ever before about the relationship between doctors and the industry, and that the organization’s “standards for ethical and transparency will improve the Australian health care system.”

Thanks to an “ineligible receiver” call from the officials at the SEC, AstraZeneca has agreed to pay $5.5 million to resolve FCPA related charges. The SEC alleged that the company did not have proper internal controls in place related to interactions with foreign officials – mostly healthcare providers – in its China and Russian subsidiaries. The agency contends that improper payments, in the form of cash, travel, and gifts, were documented as bona fide business expenses. While AstraZeneca did not admit or deny any wrongdoing, it did cooperate fully with the investigation.

This week’s review had a decidedly foreign flavor. Where compliance outside the U.S. is concerned, we recall a quote from Pulp Fiction (bet you never thought a Tarantino film would ever be referenced in blog post about compliance) when Vincent Vega is discussing the differences between European countries and the U.S. “They have everything there we have here. It’s just a little bit different.” The same can be said for compliance issues. While the principles or requirements related to drug promotion may be the same here and abroad for the most part, there are small differences between what is permitted in the U.S. and what is permitted around the world. Life sciences companies must train employees about practices that are appropriate when conducting business outside the U.S., particularly in their interactions with non-U.S. HCPs.

With that, the time has expired on this edition of the Compliance News in Review. Don’t forget to click that blue button on the right to “follow” our blog so you’ll receive notifications when we post new content.

Until next time, stay compliant and enjoy the games!

Compliance News in Review, August 25, 2016

Here’s the tune we’re whistling this week: a California state senator pulls his own proposed transparency bill; an analysis of the FDA user fee programs yields interesting information; former Insys employees in court; FCPA woes at Orthofix International; and a new way for New Jersey residents to learn how much their docs received from the industry.

Summer is coming to a close all too quickly, but you still have a few weeks to cruise the boulevard, roll down the windows and belt out that favorite song at the top of your lungs. Sadly, these anthems tend to disappear at the first hint of cool temperatures, so dance on whilst you can! While you pump up the volume on your music delivery apparatus of choice, we’ll fire up a jam of own, with this edition of the Compliance News in Review.

It’s been a Cruel Summer for a California state legislator. The state senator who proposed a drug pricing transparency bill for the state has pulled the bill from consideration, saying amendments to the bill “made it more difficult for us to accomplish our fundamental goal.”

Could a recent analysis of FDA user fees stir up some Bad Blood? The analysis of FDA user fees showed that the FDA has collected over seven billion dollars in fees since 1992. These fees account for a large percentage, in some cases the majority, of funding for FDA review programs, and there is nearly $300 million dollars in unused user fees being carried by the FDA.

An interactive map shows the Blurred Lines between New Jersey physicians and the pharmaceutical industry. A state news website created an interactive map that provides details of physician and hospital payments from the pharmaceutical industry. Users search by zip code, and see payment details for hospitals and physicians in the area. The site also has an alphabetical listing of physicians and hospitals receiving payments. Data for the site was sourced from the Open Payments website.

Orthofix International allegedly got in the Danger Zone regarding improper payments made by its Brazilian subsidiary. In a recent regulatory filing, Orthofix International registered a charge of $4.6 million to settle potential FCPA charges. The company reported the potential violation to the DOJ and SEC in 2013, and has been cooperating with both agencies to resolve the matter.

If Life is a Highway, a pair of former Insys employees may be about to head down a bumpy road. A former district sales manager and former sales representative recently pleaded not guilty to charges they provided kickbacks to doctors in exchange for prescribing the company’s fentanyl drug. The two are accused of paying speaker fees to doctors for events that were held at upscale Manhattan restaurants and were social, rather than educational, in nature.

With that, it’s time for us to boogie on out of here. We hope to see you back on the dance floor for the next edition of the Compliance News in Review. Until then, stay cool, keep the summertime jams going, and stay compliant.