false claims act

Dear Connie, the Compliance Training Specialist, Tackles Return-To-Work Policy Training

PharmaCertify Team , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Welcome to “Dear Connie, the Compliance Training Specialist,” where we answer questions about compliance training topics and present solutions for strengthening your compliance culture and reducing risk.

This week: Don’t forsake the fundamentals when building return-to-work policy training.

—————————————————————————————————

Dear Connie,

As my company considers reopening our offices under the threat of COVID-19, I’ve been asked to create training based on our new back to work policy. The policy covers precautionary measures (wearing a mask, hygiene, social distancing, etc.) as well as the potential risk factors (international travel, living with someone who has tested positive, sore throat, shortness of breath, etc.).

What type of training do you recommend based on this unique content? Obviously, face-to-face training is not plausible right now, but is one eLearning module enough for a topic this important?

Signed,

Cautious in California

Dear Cautious,

Great question! As the life sciences industry, and the country in general, plans a careful return to work, now is the time to finalize a training and communication plan to help maximize the safety and well-being of employees. A topic this important deserves not to be rushed and framing the challenge within the context of the ADDIE model is important.

Analysis

You don’t want to miss any instructional challenges on a topic like this one. For example, what are the different roles of the learners? Do you have to consider different training tools for office staff versus lab employees? How about field employees? What pre-existing knowledge does each group bring to the training? Only after you’ve established the learner groups and identified the challenges of reaching each of those groups, can you start to design the proper training.

Design

Now you need to establish the learning objectives and think about how the content will be structured and what tools will be utilized. I would certainly consider a campaign approach, perhaps starting with an eLearning module, followed by other learning nuggets, to make it more memorable and engaging. You may want to also consider on-site posters to reinforce key messages, like the need for employees to follow the rules on washing hands and not touching their faces.

Development

In a case like this, development extends well beyond just creating a storyboard for an introductory eLearning module. The content needs to be organized in a manner that maximizes the engagement for each group, as determined in the design phase. The tools and media utilized to emphasize key messages are important. Animated video, for example, is a popular trend, but you need to be careful the animation doesn’t present such serious content in an inappropriate or humorous manner.

Implementation

Don’t fall into the trap of thinking that since this is critical to their safety and well-being, the learners are going to welcome the training with open arms and dive in enthusiastically. Implementing the training in a manner that optimizes retention is critical, perhaps more than ever. Consider the way in which lessons are “chunked” and delivered across each learner’s timeline.

Evaluation

Training intended to help employees learn the rules of returning to work during the COVID-19 crisis should be evaluated and adjusted accordingly. Gather feedback from the learners through surveys and personal outreach. You need to know it’s working, and you need to answer the learners’ questions. Consider sending out short updates as the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) issues new guidance. Don’t let the training get stale!

Summary

The COVID-19 pandemic has changed the life sciences industry, but the fundamentals of memorable and effective training stay the same. Now is not the time to abandon those principles and practices to expedite the development and launch of new policy training. In fact, when faced with the challenges of ensuring the health and safety of employees, just the opposite is true.

My friends at NXLevel Solutions have over 15 years of experience developing policy training that improves retention of content and changes learner behavior. Contact Dan O’Connor at doconnor@nxlevelsolutions.com to ask how they can help ensure your “Return to Work” training helps maximize the safety of your company’s employees during these uncertain and crazy times.

Thanks for the question and stay safe!

Connie

Connie the Compliance Training Manager Tackles New Hire Training!

PharmaCertify Team , , , , , , , ,

Welcome to a new edition of “Dear Connie, the Compliance Training Specialist,” where Connie answers questions about life science compliance training concepts and discusses new ideas for making that training more effective.

This week: Connie hears from a compliance training manager looking for a more exciting way to train new sales representatives.

Dear Connie,

I know I should change my new hire compliance training session for the sales representatives because my PowerPoint deck might be getting a little stale, but I only get an hour in front of them, so I don’t really have time for a more creative approach. Any suggestions?

Concerned Compliance Manager in Cambridge

Dear Concerned,

You may be surprised to hear that an hour is more than enough time to conduct a more engaging and more memorable live training session. Now is the time to ditch that overused and dull PowerPoint deck!

Make it More Competitive

Research shows that learners are motivated by competition. So how about creating a Jeopardy-style game format with questions designed around your company’s policies and risks? In my experience, five categories, with five questions per category, fills an hour of time. Make sure you take a few minutes after each question to explain why the answer is right or wrong and ask the participants for examples of similar situations they have faced.

Depending on the size of your audience, I suggest you pick 3-5 participants per team to “represent” groups in the audience and have representatives buzz in once they think they know the answer. It’s a great way to take the learning to another level and create an interactive experience where ideas are exchanged with the audience. One warning: have someone there with a timer to make sure they don’t buzz in and then take forever to figure out the answer.

Make it More Engaging

You could also create an interactive workshop where the participants are divided into groups and asked to “solve” compliance scenarios together. Break the workshop into two activities to keep it moving and make sure each team has a tablet or laptop on a table. I like the idea of a Compliance Sprint as the first activity. Have the teams solve a series of exercises (a card sort works well) based on situations they are likely to encounter in the field.

You could also mix in a Compliance Mystery. The same teams play compliance “detective” and solve more complex scenarios with the help of a series of clues. The clues can be emails, phone call transcripts, business cards from a meeting, or whatever clues help provide hints about the scenario. Be creative and make it fun, but make sure you make it realistic in terms of their work activities. Of course, both activities should be scored and tracked on a leader board to raise the engagement level even more.

If you have the time and resources, you can certainly create the game or the workshop in-house, but my friends at PharmaCertify (that’s the compliance training division of NXLevel Solutions) have workshops just like the ones I described that are easily customized with your content. I’ve been there when their clients have used their workshops, and wow it is fun to watch the learning! They’d be happy to demo the workshops for you. Just email Tessa Hoyer at thoyer@nxlevelsolutions.com.

Thanks for the question and remember to make it fun and make it memorable!

Your compatriot in compliance training,

Connie

A Preview of the 2019 Pharmaceutical Compliance Congress

PharmaCertify Team , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
The 16th Annual Pharmaceutical Compliance Congress is scheduled for April 16-18, 2019 in Washington DC.

The 16th Annual Pharmaceutical Compliance Congress begins April 16-18 in Washington DC and as is often the case, the agenda promises a compelling mix of presentations covering topics important to new and experienced compliance professionals alike.

Tuesday, April 16th is dedicated to the Congress “prelude” and one of the sessions looks particularly interesting based on its subject matter. Nurse educators are a trending topic in life sciences compliance with the potential for patients misinterpreting the line between medical advice and a commercial sales pitch. The description for the Compliant Nurse Educator prelude includes the timely suggestion that attendees will “gain foundational and operational needed to structure and maintain compliant programs.”

On Day One, Wednesday, April 17th at 11:15 AM, the Highly-Acclaimed U.S. Healthcare Fraud and Enforcement Panel begins with current prosecutors reviewing “Top Enforcement Trends and Focal Points for 2019 and Beyond.” During the Former Prosecutors Panel that follows, three former Assistant US Attorneys will focus on “New Developments on High-Profile and Settlements Uncovering Healthcare Fraud.” The perspective from the regulator side of the table is not readily accessible outside of this type of conference and attendees will be listening carefully for suggestions and tips from those responsible for regulation.

Following the networking lunch (important tip: the networking sessions offer great opportunities to learn from your peers), Day One continues with a series of “content streams” divided by general topic matter.

Patient assistance programs (PAPs) and Patient support programs (PSPs) are certainly under scrutiny (see our recent blog post on the programs here), so we have to recommend Content Stream A: PAPs and PSPs. A team of panelists, including Jennifer McGee from Otsuka, Chetan Shankar from GSK, Francisco Ribeiro Filho of Tesaro and Ann-Marie Tejcek of Eli Lilly will speak in two sessions: Navigate the Complex Legal Landscape of PAPs and Examine PSP Enforcement Trends as Scrutiny Heats Up. Content Stream C: Transparency and Aggregate Spend is also of interest considering the pending expansion of the Sunshine Act to include Advance Practice Nurses and Physician Assistants. It’s time to update that Sunshine Act and Open Payments training!

A series of interactive workshops follow the content streams and I’m looking forward to the Beyond Due Diligence – Auditing and Monitoring Third-Parties session, in particular. Third-party vendor compliance continues to be an area of focus in the industry and Lori Queisser of Teva should bring an important global perspective to the challenges of bringing vendors into compliance as they conduct business of the company’s behalf around the world.

Speaking of hot topics – Interactive Workshop 4: Risks Associated with the Hub and Field Reimbursement Teams so I expect the impressive list of panelists, including Sarah Whipple from Akebia, Joe Philipose from Alexion, and Richard Konzelmann from Sanofi to be speaking to a crowded room of attendees anxious to hear how they are managing the compliance risks that are inextricably linked to the use of Hubs for specialty products.

After a networking and refreshment break at 4:25 PM (don’t forget to stop by the PharmaCertify Booth to see demos of our newest compliance training products), the conference transitions to a series of “think tank sessions.” Frankly, I am not sure of the difference between a workshop and a think tank, but I suppose the changing up the name does make for a more organized agenda.

Anyway, on the think tank front, the Speaker Programs – Best Practice Benchmarking is right at the top of my list. Our recently completed Managing Speaker Program Risk Compliance Foundations™ module is already popular among our client base and for good reason. The programs are fraught with risk at every stage, including planning and execution, and this session, featuring Jennifer McGee from Otsuka again, as well as Maggie Feltz of Purdue Pharma, and Rebecca Spitler of Johnson & Johnson, should prove to be a valuable primmer on how to navigate those risks.

Add Social Media – Practical and Pragmatic Guidance to our target list among the think tanks because, well, it’s social media. We’ll also be in the PAP and PSP Benchmarking – How is the Industry Adapting? think tank to hear how Casey Horton and Stefanie Doebler from Navigant are working with their clients to help minimize program risk.

Day 1 closes with an end-of-day cocktail reception and I do recommend taking the time to attend this important networking event before you run out to dinner. It’s a great opportunity to interact with your peers and learn how they are dealing with some of the same challenges you face every day.

Following the Chairman’s Review of Day One, Day Two, Thursday, April 18th opens with an interesting session titled, From the Trenches: An Inside Look at the Forces and Pressures that Drive People to Violate the Law. The idea of approaching compliance from a higher “ethics” level has been a topic for discussion in recent years and companies are clearly seeking ways to integrate the concepts into their policies and procedures. I’ll be interested to hear how the speaker, who is the CEO of Business Ethics Advisors, LLC, how is working with clients to do just that.

After a session dedicated to recent trends in enforcement, featuring Eric Rubenstein from the OIG and Heather Johnson from the FTC, the agenda takes a turn to the future with Rethinking the Compliance Profession – Where Should We Go from Here? Including such forward thinking presentations is appreciated and this look at the future of the industry should dovetail nicely from the opening session on ethics.

Next, attendees choose from what are described as “five in-depth summits.” The Small to Mid-Sized Company Resource Center holds interest for me based on the uniqueness of its title, and simply because I find the small to mid-sized company focused sessions so informative from a standpoint of learning what those with limited resources are doing to address the same challenges their peers at larger companies face.

With HCP interactions still representing so much of the compliance risk companies face, the Compliant Patient Interactions summit should be worthwhile, with an impressive array of industry professionals ideally sharing tips and suggestions for ensuring those interactions are conducted in a compliant manner. Hopefully, training is included on the list of talking points.

Following the final networking luncheon, the conference closes with the reveal of an inaugural benchmarking survey. The agenda does not list what organization conducted the survey, but I’m sure attendees will be listening closely to learn what their peers from “brand/generic, large/small and private/public” companies consider to be their top priorities on the established and emerging compliance risk areas.

Summary

The panel presentations, workshops, think tanks, and summits I touch on in this preview represent just a few of the sessions CBI has planned for this year’s conference. The Pharmaceutical Compliance Congress never fails to deliver the content and networking opportunities industry professionals need to stay abreast of current risk areas, policies, and best practices. I highly recommend the conference for the new and established life sciences compliance professional.

If you are considering the conference but have yet to register, we are still offering discounts on the regular conference registration rate. Contact me at smurphy@nxlevelsolutions.com if you’d like to take advantage of that discount. If you are attending, don’t forget to stop by the PharmaCertify booth to say hi and let me know what you think of our blog. As always, your feedback is appreciated.

Thanks for reading and I will see you in Washington!

Sean Murphy
Editor
Compliance Training Intelligence Blog

PAPs and PSPs: Training Beyond the In‑Program Staff

PharmaCertify Team , , , , , , , , , , ,

Patient Assistance Programs (PAPs) and Patient Support Programs (PSPs) are in the news. The programs are under increased scrutiny for violations of the Anti-Kickback Statute, HIPAA, and False Claims Act. Recent settlements and Corporate Integrity Agreements highlight the need for vigilant and more effective training for these programs.

Nicole Serena Waldron & Associates

With that in mind, we recently sat down with Nicole Serena, Senior Consultant for Waldron & Associates and 25-year industry professional, to discuss her suggestions for how to approach PAP and PSP training to better reduce the risks and the red flags associated with the programs.

A Focus on Customer-Facing Staff

Serena began by highlighting the need to extend training beyond those working directly in the programs to other employees who require a fundamental awareness of how they work, why they are important, and the associated risks. Everyone involved, particularly the sales representatives, MSLs, and nurse educators who interact with healthcare professionals need to be aware of the programs and understand that value.

Serena points out that when a company is launching a specialty or biological product, healthcare professionals will often ask if the company has an assistance program for the product. “Depending on the company and what kind of roles are involved when launching a product,” she says, “sales representatives, MSLs, and nurse educators are all part of the team introducing the program to a clinic and discussing how it supports the patients. They all need to be trained on what they can say, and they need to know they can’t give any incentive for patients to be enrolled.”

According to Serena, when representatives don’t have the proper training and they don’t understand their company’s assistance and support programs, their interactions with HCPs hold the potential for increased risk. “Since they are the first people to hear about problems customers have with a PAP or PSP, representatives need to be careful how they react to that information,” she says, “and since they are responsible for managing the relationship with the HCP, they need to be careful about not over promising.”

In addition, the training shouldn’t assume that employees understand the programs just because they have worked in the pharmaceutical industry. “An employee’s previous position may have been with a division of the company that dealt with a general medicine product, like a high blood pressure pill or antibiotic, which would not involve a PAP or PSP,” says Serena, “so when he or she gets moved into a specialty product role, that background training is critical.”

Extend Training Beyond the Field Force

Vendors are sometimes overlooked for training, particularly when they claim to have their own PAP and PSP training in place. Even if that is the case, rolling out the company training to the vendor’s staff helps ensures consistency in messaging and accountability of trainee rosters. In other words, the vendors need to be trained using the same training the inside employees receive.

According to Serena, “vendor work forces have quite a large turnover in the staff working on the programs, so it can be difficult for them to have enough resources to track training.” The pharmaceutical company needs to take responsibility for that, roll out the company’s own training to the vendors, and track it on company systems.

Since marketing departments are often responsible for funding the programs and developing program materials, marketing staff should be included on the training roster. “All marketing staff need a base level of training,” says Serena, “and those tasked with working in partnership with the in-program team need a deeper level of training.”

In addition, since Medical Information is tasked with answering HCP questions that come in by phone, an awareness on how the programs work is critical for them as well. Add the Finance Department employees to the training list as well. They need to understand the reason for the program, its value to the company, and the justification for why it shouldn’t be eliminated when budgets need to be cut. Finally, don’t overlook the need for PAP and PSP training for the Compliance Department. Compliance is often staffed with professionals from other disciplines across the company and their awareness and familiarity with the programs may be limited.

Although this post delves into the broad scope of employee groups who should be trained on PAPs and PSPs, the list should not be considered complete by any means. Every company’s approach to the programs is different and the structure, frequency, and roster lists for program training will vary.

The stakes are high though and careful planning is needed to help ensure a higher level of compliance across the company. As Serena so succinctly puts it, “everyone in the industry talks about the importance of being patient centric. These programs speak to the value of that focus and the company’s reputation and that must be taken into consideration when planning the training.”

Thanks for reading!

Sean Murphy
PharmaCertify by NXLevel Solutions

Key Takeaways from the 2018 Compliance Congress West

PharmaCertify Team , , , , , , , , , , ,
Early morning over San Francisco, the site of the 2018 Compliance Congress West.

To say the audience at the 19th Life Sciences Compliance Congress West was energized and engaged is an understatement. The size and scope of the two-day conference led to unusually interactive discussions, with the audience eagerly sharing their experiences along with the presenters and panelists.  For someone relatively new to the field of life sciences compliance training, I found the exchange of ideas and advice quite educational and enlightening.

PharmaCertify was there as a conference sponsor and we found an agenda filled with information designed to help attendees strengthen their compliance cultures and reduce risk, which of course is a mission close to our hearts from a compliance training standpoint.  Here are my takeaways, with a focus on training of course (it’s what we do):

1. Build an ethical culture, not just a compliant one.

This was a recurring theme, and it’s a compelling one. On the surface, the line between ethics and compliance may appear inconsequential and not significant enough to be worthy of consideration. But more companies are evolving away from a rules-based approach to compliance to one that stresses ethical decision making as the foundation for their principle-based policies. It begins with a question: are people doing the right thing when no one is looking?

For us, the answer begins with a new approach to training. Modern life sciences companies need to teach the value of ethical decision making, and not just recite the rules and regulations. Training needs to instill in learners the understanding that the company trusts and expects them to do just that.

2. Hubs are in, so get that training out!

Patient support hubs are trending, and since they serve as the “connection point” for so many stakeholders (patients, providers, and physicians), they come with a high level of risk. With the influence of commercialized companies, and the lack of guidance from the Office of Inspector General and Department of Justice, patient support hubs are a hot bed of kickback and false claims risks.

Job aids, clear business rules and program guidance, and a robust training curriculum are necessary to mitigate that risk. All parties involved, including vendors, must be continuously trained on how to interact with patients and understand what they can or cannot say and do.

3. If you think PSPs and PAPs are in the regulatory spotlight, you’re right.

The scrutiny on Patient Support Programs (PSPs) and Patient Assistance Programs (PAPs) is intensifying, with a growing number of settlements (Jazz Pharmaceuticals, United Therapeutics) raising questions over the idea of companies donating to independent charities. In addition to causing potential false claims and HIPAA violations, the donations raise concerns that they may be intended to induce patients to purchase certain products and implicate the Anti-Kickback Statute.

As was highlighted during the conference, PSPs and PAPs can be beneficial to patients, but commercial organizations cannot have any influence on the support being provided. Training needs to emphasize that sales representatives are not permitted to discuss specific PAPs or disease state funds with patients or healthcare professionals. And as prescription costs climb, the scrutiny and risks will continue to grow.

4. Nurse Educators: Are they here to stay?

The jury is still out. As defined during the presentation on nurse educators, “white coat marketing” refers to the use of healthcare professionals in marketing or sales activity, and therein lies the risk with the use of nurse educators. According to the Office of Inspector General (OIG), the practice is scrutinized under the Anti-Kickback Statute because patients rely on the advice of physicians, they may “have difficulty distinguishing between medical advice and a commercial sales pitch.”

Recently unsealed qui tam cases highlight the risks and cause for concern, with one company deploying “nurse ambassadors” directly to patients’ homes and another implementing nurse-led adherence programs designed to increase product refills. Patients tend to trust the opinion and advice of their physician, and by extension, their nurse educator. However, it can be confusing for a patient to decipher advice from marketing, and exposure points emerge when nurse educators are trained similarly to sales representatives and conducting calls with those representatives. Asking yourself key questions about the training:

  • What materials do the nurse educators use (disease state, promotional, fair, balanced, etc.)?
  • Does the training focus on adherence and education instead of sales and marketing?
  • Does the training resemble sales training (e.g., overcoming objections, cold calling)?

5. Speaker Programs: How is this still happening?

The idea that speaker programs bring high levels of risk is not a secret, so much so that one audience member even asked, “how is this (insert expletive) still happening?” Good question. Selling in the life sciences industry is a relationship-based activity, and back in the “good old days,” there was little monitoring around meals, vacations, golf outings, etc. Now, the risks are rampant and include speaker selection (make sure they are credible), payments, receipts, the amount of money spent, spouses or guests in attendance, and analytics. The panelists also used Insys as a case study for the importance of communication, particularly email. Multiple documented emails within the company revealed how they were trying to utilize speakers. Training needs to emphasize the need for open, honest and communication, with no hidden agendas because as was quoted about the Insys case, “it takes a very long time to turn your ship around.”

6. Calibrate Your Compliance Training for Greater Impact

There’s plenty of guidance available from the DOJ and OIG to assist ethics and compliance professionals with determining their training priorities. The OIG guidance alone offers 49 distinct metrics for communication, education, and training. It can be a bit overwhelming, so what’s a compliance officer to do?

A presentation by Dan O’Connor of NXLevel and Jeremy Lutsky of Theravance offered attendees a practical framework for designing, developing, and implementing compliance training, beginning with the questions, “Is there a training need?” In other words, is there actually a knowledge and/or skill deficit or is there a problem with incentives, motivation, unclear expectations, etc.?

Assuming there is a training need, ethics and compliance officers can use the long-established ADDIE (Analysis-Design-Development-Implementation-Evaluation) process to efficiently attack the problem, beginning with analyzing risk by role in the organization. Several pragmatic approaches were shared by Dan and Jeremy, including use of the “3F” Curriculum Framework, Bloom’s Taxonomy, and a structured process for evaluating existing training.

7. The food choices in San Francisco are, well, pretty good.

The restaurant choices are clearly bountiful in the City by the Bay and we leave you today with a brief note on two that we enjoyed during our stay:

We couldn’t resist the chowder at the Hog Island Oyster Co. and we weren’t disappointed!

The Hog Island Oyster Company is nestled in the Ferry Building Marketplace, where you can watch the ferries come and go as you enjoy freshly-shucked oysters on the half shell. Choose oysters from various locations or order a dozen or two to try them all! They all come with a fresh vinaigrette or cocktail sauce if you so desire. While their main stake is oysters, the rest of the menu is not neglected. The chowder comes stacked with clams in a nice cream base with veggies, potatoes, bacon and cheese! And the fish sliders are perfectly crispy paired with a tangy coleslaw that compliments the fish nicely. From the bar, the Chardonnay from Napa was crisp and light, and the Wolfback Ridge IPA was a perfect pairing for the fish sliders.

The Douglas Room is a quaint restaurant located adjacent to the Tilden Hotel that offers a boutique gastropub vibe to transport diners to another time (think speakeasy era). The talented mixologists curate creative spins on classic martinis behind the bar to help authenticate the experience. For dinner or late-night snacks, the innovative menu features locally sourced and seasonal ingredients. We enjoyed the shishito peppers, duck confit wings, wedge salad, and Tilden burger. The portions were perfect for sharing, and the presentation was stunning. We’ll be back when the conference returns to San Francisco!

Tessa Hoyer, PharmaCertify by NXLevel Solutions

News and Notes from the 15th Annual Pharmaceutical Compliance Congress

PharmaCertify Team , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

CBI’s annual Pharmaceutical Compliance Congress, which took place April 23rd to the 25th in Washington DC, featured industry leaders and government representatives espousing the usual best practices for building and maintaining an effective compliance program, but this year’s agenda offered a few surprises and changes in the regulatory wind. The notes below highlight some of the sessions we found to be particularly interesting and newsworthy.

Day 1

CCO Exchange – Adapting and Evolving Compliance Programs in Support of Innovation

Following the opening remarks and a session covering politics and the pharmaceutical industry, the conference kicked into gear as Maggie Feltz of Purdue Pharma, Jennifer McGee of Otsuka, Jill Fallows Macaluso of Novo Nordisk, and Sujata Dayal of Johnson & Johnson discussed their process for “partnering with business” in the company to maximize the strength of their compliance programs. The panelists stressed the importance of establishing a relationship with business that is built on open dialogue and trust.  Documentation is also key to that relationship and as one panelist pointed out, “the government cares about how you document that you are preventing issues.” It’s important to “shape the way you are perceived in the relationship by using business language,” she emphasized, and to measure your own effectiveness by simply determining whether business is inviting you back to the table. Your compliance program is only effective if you have a seat at that table.

Once the partnership is established, you need to “get the business to think and talk about risk and conduct a benefit-risk analysis,” according to one panelist. Another reminded the audience that Corporate Integrity Agreements (CIAs) hold important clues about topics of focus for the government. This is particularly enlightening considering the recent Aegerion and United Therapeutics CIAs that dealt with third-party patient assistance programs, a topic discussed throughout the conference.

The panelists also covered working with third-party vendors and the need for monitoring and testing of those vendors to ensure they are complying. As one panelist put it, “you need to be sure those companies are applying your standards.”

Stakeholder Spotlight – Strategies for Collaborating with Business Partners to Enhance Compliance Enterprise-Wide   

Gail Cawkwell, Medical Affairs at Intercept Pharmaceuticals, Cecilia Matthews, Human Resources at MedImmune, Gregory Moss, Deputy General Counselor at Kadmon, and Gary Cupit, CEO of PortA Pharmaceuticals provided the business perspective on the compliance/business partnership. The panelists reiterated key points from the CCO session, with one emphasizing the need for the two departments to tackle the issues together as business partners and another seeing compliance not as a goal, but “a base objective that underlies everything.”

One panelist emphasized the need to be aggressive in the approach, pointing out that she is the person “bothering the compliance department, digging into SOPs, asking why they do things that way, and asking how each policy helps the company.”  She prides herself on partnering with compliance to “find a better way to do it.”

Highly-Acclaimed U.S. Healthcare Fraud and Enforcement Panel – Past and Present Prosecutor Parley

A large group of current and past government enforcement representatives covered the current compliance risks facing the life sciences industry. The session started with a discussion about the nation’s opioid crisis and how each office is addressing the epidemic. One current assistant U.S. attorney summarized the threat to the industry succinctly, “If your company is involved in opioids at all, you are under intense scrutiny.”

In one of the more interesting moments of the conference, the panelists pointed out that the focus on off-label enforcement has shifted away from large pharmaceutical companies to smaller ones. According to one speaker, small companies and startups are under greater pressure to sell and to save money, especially if they are funded by venture capital companies. That leads to a higher risk of off-label promotion.

Continuing a theme, prescription assistance programs and patient charities were addressed in relation to kickback risk. As stated, “any coordination between the charity and the company that shows the company is just trying to pay for its product being prescribed is a concern.” At least two current regulators supported the idea of self-disclosure and being honest about potential violations. “Being candid about where the compliance program has fallen short and the steps the company is going to take to correct the problem is important,” one of them said.

The group of former regulators, who mostly now serve as industry counsel, touched on exclusion as a risk. While it may be considered a rarely-sought tool, prosecutors have the threat of exclusion available to them as leverage. They also delved into the importance of data and reminded the audience that prosecutors are indeed scouring Sunshine Act data.

Patient Assistance Programs and Reimbursement Hub Services Compliance – A New Wave of Enforcement Actions

Attendees were provided five options for the first breakout sessions. The PAP and Hub Services panel was moderated by Jane Yoon of Paul Hastings LLP, and featured Peter Agnoletto of Sanofi, Sarah Whipple of Akebia Therapeutics, and Evan Bartell of KPMG LLP.

The discussion began with a polling question asking attendees where the management of donations sits in their organization. Corporate Social Responsibility and the Grants Committee were the top answers. The question led to a discussion over best practices, with one speaker warning, “you at least need to take commercial out of any involvement with donations.” Another admitted that not having a say in how the money is spent is hard concept for the business to grasp but the separation is important.

In the next polling question, attendees were asked if they monitor relationships and interactions with the foundations. 57% replied yes, and 28% said no. The panel reminded the audience that recent CIAs included the stipulation that those relationships are monitored.

Another question was focused on sales representatives and their involvement with donations. 48% of the audience said their reps are provided with talking points. Panelists suggested that if the sales reps are involved, compliance needs to understand how the information is being used. Clear guidelines need to be established and the reps need to be trained on those guidelines.

Off-label Communications – Deep Dive into the New Regulatory Updates and Actions

Angela Rodin of KPMG LLP and Laura Terrell of DLA Piper LLP presented the update on the status of off-label promotion trends and enforcement in the industry. Starting in 2012, enforcement shifted, as companies argued that off-label marketing is protected under the First Amendment and therefore cannot be prosecuted under misbranding provisions of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA). One presenter pointed out that while the government is no long pursuing off-label promotion as a stand-alone FDCA case, it continues to enforce False Claims Act (FCA) and Anti-Kickback Statute (AKS) cases related to off-label promotion.

The bottom line is that even with strong support of free speech as a defense of off-label promotion, life sciences companies still need to be cautious. Clear and effective training is still needed.

Social Media – New Challenges and Updates

Elizabeth Kim of Loeb & Loeb LLP began the social media presentation with the underlying premise that while the digital landscape has changed dramatically over recent years, the legal landscape remains the same. Even on social media, promotional statements cannot be false or misleading and communications must be consistent with labeling and fair-balanced.

Social media is challenging, the presenter stressed, because it promotes a dialogue, which means the company has a lack of control over the conversation. But there are some steps companies can take that at least help with the control. The ability for readers to comment on posts can be turned off on Facebook. No such control exists with Twitter. In addition, key words can be flagged on Facebook to help monitor comments. Unfortunately, as the presenter noted, most companies lack the resources and personnel to properly monitor social media outlets.

She also mentioned that while companies have no obligation to correct third-party, independent comments, public, unsolicited requests for off-label information must be met with a limited response to contact Medical Affairs only. “If you do reply,” she said, “responses should be narrowly tailored. Watch out for getting into arguments.”

The FDA’s Office of Prescription Drug Promotion (OPDP) has issued 233 warning letters over the last ten years for omitting information, minimizing risk information, and overstating efficacy claims on social media. As existing platforms evolve, and new ones appear, the need for updated training to ensure your field-based employees are abiding by laws like the FCA and FDCA, as well as OIG guidance and the PhRMA Code, is critical.

Medical Affairs and MSL Oversight

The Medical Affairs panel included Tina Beamon, Alicia Temoche, and Stephanie Macholtz from Alexion Pharmaceuticals, and Christine O’Connor-Fiore from Boehringer Ingelheim. The session began with the panelists establishing the general rules for how Medical Affairs may interact with healthcare professionals. Attendees were reminded that Medical Affairs can “do things R&D and Commercial cannot do” and “they are not limited to the label.” MSLs provide training to consultants for speaker programs but in the words of one panelist, “they are not Commercial and their integrity must be protected.”

The panelists admitted that the model for Medical Affairs and Commercial interactions has changed in reaction to marketplace changes. Medical Affairs should share insights as long as those insights are not off-label. “The walls between Commercial and Medical Affairs are coming down,” she said, “and a framework needs to be in place to protect the integrity of the MSL.”

Behavioral Compliance – Using Psychology to Make Programs More Effective

In one of the more unique sessions I’ve witnessed in years of attending compliance congresses, this session focused on behavioral compliance as a tool for generating more compliant outcomes. Yogesh Bahl, of AlixPartners, Kevin Ryan of Novo Nordisk, and Charlene Davis of Sun Pharmaceuticals provided conceptual concepts around the philosophy and practical application of behavioral compliance, using ideas known as “ethical nudges.”

The session began with the audience being asked to provide feedback on which of two compliance posters they thought were more effective. Essentially, one reflected a “rules-based” approach, and the other a “values-based” one. The values-based poster was the more popular choice and the content of the session supported that approach. The underlying premise behind the ethical nudges is that “people become ethical by doing ethical things.” Ethical nudges were essentially defined as “interactions based on the understanding of internal decision-making to promote desirable choices.” They included “read and affirm” documents presented right before a critical HCP interaction, visual cues like signage and posters, and micro-training launched strategically in conjunction with the need for ethical decision making.

Critical CIA and Enforcement Learnings – Zero-In on Emerging Trends to Elevate Compliance Safeguards      

The key points of this session were no surprise considering the oft-repeated focus of recent CIAs. BJ D’Avella of Deloitte and Touche LLP and Seth Lundy of King & Spalding LLP reminded attendees that “the focus of CIAs had shifted to interactions with patients, and more than ever, companies need to have a Risk Assessment and Mitigation Plan (RAMP) in place.” That RAMP needs to include activity-based risks in addition to the usual product-based risks.

One of the presenters pointed out that the OIG is focusing on a “smaller number of CIAs that send messages to the industry.” He reminded the audience that CIAs are not laws, but they are a strong indicator of where to focus risk mitigation efforts.

Day 2

CCO Scenario Symposium – What Would You Do?

After a review of the sessions and events of Day 1 by Michael Shaw of GlaxoSmithKline, Day 2 began with this session, during which panelists were asked to participate in a mock case study of “Bad Pharma Co” and expand on lessons learned from this fictional company. Beth Levine of Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Ashley Watson of Merck, Jerald Korn of Tesaro, and Keith McGahan of Spectrum Pharmaceuticals were asked to discuss the optimal organizational structure companies like the mock one presented in the case study. One presenter felt that having compliance as part of the legal department was a benefit because it gave her greater access to the CEO and others in the board of directors. Others felt that if compliance has that type of access, “it doesn’t matter where they sit.”

Other scenarios brought up in the case study led presenters to offer tips on dealing with compliance situations and those who raise the concerns. For example, one speaker emphasized that “no matter the source, the company’s obligation is to search for the facts of the case.” Speculation about the whistleblower and his or her credibility should not come into play. Also, “if someone sends information about a violation anonymously, it needs to be kept that way.”

Meeting of the Enforcement Minds

Heather Johnson from the Federal Trade Commission, Sally Molloy from the Department of Justice, and Eric Rubenstein from the OIG presented their suggestions for companies to keep their compliance programs attuned to current regulatory challenges. On the topic of bribery for example, one presenter suggested that “internal controls need to be robust and designed so that they are not siloed. It’s all bribery.” Another emphasized that recent trends point to Medicare and Medicaid fraud as a primary source for qui tam cases.

Beyond the Seven Elements of and Effective Compliance Program – What Else Are You Doing?

As a compliance training company, this session, featuring Jerald Korn of Tesaro, Chad Morin of bluebird bio, and Gregory Moss of Kadmon Holdings, held particularly interest for us. As one presenter stated, “creating a brand for the compliance department is a fun way to convey important information.” That holds true for the training as well, and we work with companies to create a continuous, engaging, and “fun” curriculum.

Another speaker noted the importance of being creative in the policies to help ensure compliant behavior, as well as the need to establish a collaborative culture. As stated, “you’re not trying to check the boxes on all seven elements, you’re trying to build a robust program that is effective.”

Existing and Emerging State Laws Governing Transparency Reporting

The state laws presentation, with Maggie Feltz and Michael Grandison of Purdue Pharma, and Brian Bohnenkamp of King & Spalding, LLP, began with tips for managing aggregate spend:

  • Train company-wide, not just the sales force
  • Train, retrain, then train some more
  • Monitor throughout the year

The panel pointed out that state laws fall into three categories; drug pricing transparency, aggregate spend laws, and sales representative licensing and reporting laws. The landscape across all three changes quickly and they expect 2018 to be as busy as 2017.

In recent state-related news, Maryland’s law was found to be unconstitutional and according to one panelist, that “has quieted some of what other states have been considering.” Oregon was brought up as the most challenging law since it “requires documentation to support your documents.” In New Jersey, where the law was passed on the last day of the outgoing administration, one speaker mentioned that Governor Murphy’s team is considering major changes. On the drug pricing front, the panel expects two or three more laws to be implemented.

Obviously, the state law landscape is confusing and changes are happening at a dizzying rate. As one speaker emphasized, diligence, and continuous training is necessary to “ensure every decision-maker is aware of new requirements.”

Maximization of Compliance Resources

I close with what may have been the best session of the entire conference! (okay, I may be a bit biased since this panel included my colleague, and head of PharmaCertify, Dan O’Connor.) Dan was joined by Chad Morin of bluebird bio and Laurie Kathleen Durousseau of Rigel Pharmaceuticals. The session focused on how compliance professionals can best focus their time and energy toward those activities that are most critical during the various growth stages of a life science company from pre-clinical to established.

Starting with a quick poll of the audience, the panel first determined the average size and stage of companies represented. Most of the audience members were an “n of 1” compliance department in a company with 200 or fewer employees that is in the “Clinical” or “First Product” stage. The panel then shared their suggestions for which compliance-related activities to prioritize during each growth stage. In the “first product” stage for example, aggregate spend transparency reporting; government price reporting; specialized training by function; and patient support program design were discussed, among other topics.

The panelists also covered the need for small departments to partner with the business, as well as other departments, to spread the resource load and accomplish the objectives of each stage. For any compliance department challenged with limited resources and personnel, it was a worthwhile thirty minutes of learning. If you missed the conference, Dan would be happy to provide his perspective on the topic. Feel free to contact him at doconnor@nxlevelsolutions.com.

Summary

The world of life sciences compliance is changing, and so is CBI’s Pharmaceutical Compliance Congress. This year’s conference presented a compelling balance of traditional content that newcomers to the field should find valuable as a base of knowledge, with enough updates on key areas of regulatory focus (off-label, patient assistance programs, state laws, etc.) to keep the seasoned compliance professionals in the audience satisfied with agenda. It also offers industry professionals a rare opportunity to meet face-to-face with their peers and hear best practices for strengthening their compliance cultures and reducing risk. I highly recommend the conference next year for chief compliance officers, specialists, managers, and anyone working in the life sciences compliance training industry. Kudos to CBI and all the presenters!

Thanks for reading.

Sean Murphy
Editor, PharmaCertify Compliance Training Insights Blog

A Preview of the 15th Annual Pharmaceutical Compliance Congress!

PharmaCertify Team , , , , , , , , , ,

The 15th Annual Pharmaceutical Compliance Congress is only a week away and the conference agenda offers a new twist on the standard array of presentations by industry leaders and government regulators. Here are some of the presentations and panel sessions the PharmaCertify™ team is looking forward to:

Day 1: Tuesday, April 24

CCO Exchange
Adapting and Evolving Compliance Programs in Support of Innovation

Following the chairman’s opening remarks, and the “luminary address” that kicks off the conference, this panel session features leading industry representatives, including Maggie Feltz of Purdue Pharma and Sujata Dayal of Johnson & Johnson. The title is intriguing and I look forward to hearing the panelists discuss how they have adapted their programs, and their training curriculum, to take advantage of advances in technology and new concepts like microlearning and continuous learning.

Stakeholder Spotlight
Evaluation of Compliance Programs from the Internal Customer Perspective

The focus on “internal customer perspective” in this session caught my eye. It’s a stakeholder group that is not often discussed at conferences, and I’m curious to hear how the presenters define internal customers and the parameters and tools used tools for evaluation.

Highly-Acclaimed U.S. Healthcare Fraud and Enforcement Panel
Past and Present Prosecutor Parley 

The description of this unique session promises a “point/counterpoint” approach to the subject matter, with current and former prosecutors and defense attorneys presenting their views on recent settlements and on-going investigations. Typically, the two sides present in separate sessions, so this joint “parlay” approach should prove to be engaging and revealing.

Patient Assistant Programs (PAPs) and Reimbursement Hub Services Compliance
A New Wave of Enforcement Actions

The latter part of the title makes this session so compelling and the “wave of enforcement actions” has led to several of our clients asking about training on PAPs and Reimbursement Services compliance (look for that addition to our curriculum of customizable off-the-shelf compliance modules in the near future). I am curious to hear how the industry representatives on the panel are dealing with the need for training considering the growing regulatory focus.

Master Class Series 3
Behavioral Compliance – Using Behavioral Psychology to Make Compliance Programs More Effective

This one is on the top of my list! After spending over ten years in the life sciences compliance training space, I recognize the key to flattening the proverbial “forgetting curve” is the utilization of modern and continuous learning tools and techniques built on advances in behavioral psychology and the science of learning. Look for me in the front row!

Day 2: Wednesday, April 25

Patient Support Programs Track
All Three Sessions

Continuing the focus on Patient Assistant Programs and Reimbursement Hubs covered in one session on Day 1, this track features three sessions that should shed light on a burgeoning area of enforcement: Evolving Role and Landscape of Patient Advocacy in Life Sciences; Mitigate Risk Within Hub Operations; and Legal Nuances and Limitations of Drug Copayment Offset Programs.

Small to Mid-Sized Bio/Pharma Working Group Track
Beyond the Seven Elements of An Effective Compliance Program – What Else Are You Doing?  

The definition of an effective compliance program has evolved well past the point of simply covering the seven elements first established by the OIG years ago. From a training standpoint, modern continuous learning techniques and tools have the potential to increase the retention of key compliance concepts and further reduce risk. I am curious to know what strategies the four industry professionals featured in this session have integrated into their programs to make it even stronger.

Small to Mid-Sized Bio/Pharma Working Group Track
Maximization of Compliance Resources

I may be a little biased on this one since my colleague, Dan O’Connor, will be joined by Chad Morin of bluebird bio and Laurie Kathleen Durousseau of Rigel Pharmaceuticals to discuss strategies for building and maintaining a strong compliance program when resources are at a minimum due to staffing and budgetary constraints.

Transparency and Open Payments Track
CMS Transparency and Open Payments Update
Existing and Emerging State Laws Governing Transparency Reporting      

With transparency being such a regulatory focus and risk area, I anticipate a large and rapt audience for the presentation by Robin Usi, Director for the Division of Data and Informatics at CMS. In addition, the ever-changing list of states updating their existing transparency laws, as well as those launching new regulations (we see you New Jersey), moves the second session high on our attendance sheet.

Compliance Café and Community Exchange

Kudos to CBI and the panelists involved for this novel and clever way of closing out the conference! This collaborative session offers a great opportunity for attendees to collaborate with their peers and exchange ideas and suggestions from what they heard throughout the conference, and most-importantly, “align learnings and develop next-level strategies to take back to the office.” Well done.

The 15th Annual Pharmaceutical Compliance Congress promises a plethora of opportunities to catch up on the latest in regulatory and enforcement news, as well as best practices for building and strengthening an effective compliance program. We hope you’ll take a few minutes in between sessions to visit the PharmaCertify Booth in the Exhibit Hall to say hello and see demos of our newest compliance training solutions. Our mission is to help you build a stronger compliance culture and reduce risk, and we welcome the opportunity to show you how we’ve done just that for our clients.

Thanks for reading and we’ll see you in Washington!

Sean Murphy
Product and Marketing Manager
PharmaCertify by NXLevel Solutions

Compliance Trends 2018: Our Point of View

PharmaCertify Team , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The festivities have ended and a shiny new year is upon us, so we are switching hats – from party to prognostication – to delve into what we see as the hot compliance topics and trends for 2018. Based on our reading of the enforcement tea leaves, several 2017 topics should remain at the forefront, but our prediction on the level of activity emanating from the OPDP has changed from last year. So if you’ve resolved to stay up-to-date on all the compliance news fit to blog this year, what better way to start than with this look ahead.

We expect funding for patient assistance organizations, which are charities that provide financial assistance to patients to help cover the cost of medications, to be a trending topic in 2018. In 2016, federal agencies started to focus on the topic and issued subpoenas related to support provided to these charities. In 2017, two companies entered into settlements with the government over that funding. The government considers the practice to be a violation of the Anti-Kickback Statute because the funding offsets the co-pay of patients who participate in government healthcare programs.

Donations to charities that assist with medication costs are permitted, but assistance cannot be directed to patients who are prescribed the donating company’s medications. We would not be surprised to see the government take more of an interest in the financial relationship between the industry and charitable patient organizations this year. Training must emphasize the need to maintain appropriate independence between the company and the patient organizations it chooses to support.

In 2017, a small group of states passed laws related to price reporting, sales representative registration, and physician payment caps. That trend should continue in 2018 and the laws will most likely be focused on pricing transparency, as opposed to spend transparency, which was more common a few years ago. Expect more states to follow New Jersey’s lead and implement broader restrictions and caps on payments to healthcare professionals. The law is intended to combat the growing opioid addiction crisis.

2017 was a surprising year for the Office of Prescription Drug Promotion (OPDP). After a flurry of letters at the end of 2016, we expected the agency to continue that trend into 2017, but only four letters were issued the entire year. That is a record low. Don’t expect a dramatic increase this year.

The letters that were issued last year were focused on false and misleading statements related to risk and omission of risk. Two industry settlements in 2017 included charges of failure to disclose risk in violation of the Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy, so emphasizing the importance of fair balance and truthful, accurate promotional statements when training sales representatives is critical.

On the global front, we would not be surprised to see an uptick in Foreign Corrupt Practices Act enforcement following the implementation of new processes that reward companies for self-disclosing potential violations and cooperating with investigations.

With that, we end this “preview” edition of the Compliance News in Review. To be automatically notified when we post new editions of the News in Review, conference highlights, or compliance training tips, just click the “follow” button on the right side of this page.

Have a safe and compliant 2018!

The 2017 Compliance Year in Review!

PharmaCertify Team , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

As the year winds to a close, we take a break from the hustle and bustle of holiday preparations to reflect on the 2017 trends, topics, and focal points from the world of life sciences compliance. It’s been a busy year, with some expected updates, along with a few surprises, filling our News in Review missives from month to month. So, grab a cup of egg nog, fire up the Yule Log on YouTube, and enjoy this “year in review” edition of the Compliance News in Review.

Drug pricing transparency was a hot topic at the end of 2016, and the trend carried through 2017. The rules for Chicago’s new sales representative licensure law, which is intended to help combat opioid addiction, went into effect. The law requires representatives to obtain a license to sell products in the city and to document their interactions with healthcare professionals. In California, drug manufacturers must now notify the State and other payers in advance when they intend to raise the wholesale acquisition cost of a drug over a certain percentage, and when new drugs are expected to have a wholesale acquisition cost that exceeds the Medicare Part D specialty drug threshold. Nevada passed similar legislation, but its law focuses on diabetes drugs. Nevada also requires sales representatives to be licensed and provide reports of their interactions with HCPs. Finally, Louisiana also jumped on the pricing transparency train.

In an effort to combat the opioid crisis,  Governor Christie in New Jersey issued rules that cap payments made to healthcare professionals by pharmaceutical companies.  Maine passed a gift ban law similar to the existing Minnesota law and, not surprisingly, we heard from Vermont in 2017. The attorney general there is reportedly investigating whether drug and device companies are adhering to the state’s HCP gift ban law.

Not all state-level action was successful. Missouri’s proposed price transparency law did not pass during the past legislative session, and a bill in California to restrict gifts and payments to HCPs passed the state Senate, but was rejected in the Assembly.

Pharmaceutical support for patient assistance charities was another 2016 hot topic that continued through 2017.  An IRS investigation into one of the charities focused on whether it provided an improper benefit to pharmaceutical donors by using the donations to purchase the drugs manufactured by those same companies. Support of patient assistance charities also figured into one company’s healthcare fraud criminal and civil settlement with the government.

2017 was a quiet year for the Office of Prescription Drug Promotion (OPDP). During December of 2016, the agency dropped a flurry of letters, but 2017 will likely see record low in activity with only three letters being issued so far for the entire year.

This was an interesting year in bribery and corruption enforcement. It began with a bang in January as the Serious Fraud Office entered into its first major Deferred Prosecution Agreement. With a changing of the guard in the U.S., FCPA actions were more subdued, but the diagnostic test company, Alere, settled with the Securities and Exchange Commission over improper payments to foreign officials allegedly made by its Colombian and Indian subsidiaries.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) published its Compliance Program Evaluation Guidance in 2017. The document offers details on what the agency considers to be an effective compliance program. Perhaps most notably, the DOJ made its Foreign Corrupt Practices Act Pilot Program permanent. The pilot program ended in early 2017, but it was effectively made permanent with the announcement of a new FCPA Enforcement Policy. Like the pilot program, the new policy encourages companies to self-report possible FCPA violations and rewards companies for their  cooperation during investigations.

With that, we close out another issue of the Compliance News in Review, and another year in the wonderful world of life sciences compliance. We look forward to keeping you up-to-date on all compliance news fit to blog in 2017 and continuing to provide you with an ever-expanding suite of PharmaCertify compliance training products and services.

Thank you for reading. Have a warm and wonderful holiday season and a happy New Year!

Open Payments Funding and Another Kickback Case in the News

PharmaCertify Team , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

An Open Payments letter from two senators, a list of diabetes drugs from Nevada, near silence from the Office of Prescription Drug and Promotion (OPDP), and an unsealed kickback case…all in this edition of the Compliance News in Review.

Thanksgiving is just around the corner! There’s nothing like a day of food, family, friends, and parades (and of course, football!) to kick off the holiday season. Can’t you just smell the turkey and fixings permeating the hallways and your olfactory senses now? Before we go unpack our “Thanksgiving pants,” we’ll leave you with a different type of tasty morsel: a new edition of the Compliance News in Review. Bon appetit!

Senators Richard Blumenthal and Chuck Grassley don’t want to see CMS’s Center for Program Integrity (CPI) left at the kids’ table. They sent a letter to the acting Health and Human Services Secretary urging that funding for the CPI be made a priority. The CPI is responsible for managing the Open Payments database. The letter includes references to “recent reports that have raised concerns about the effect payments to health professionals may have on opioid prescribing practices, which in many ways has exacerbated this ongoing public health epidemic.”

Nevada’s Department of Health and Human Services published its list of three dozen diabetes drugs that are subject to the State’s new transparency law. Manufacturers with a drug on the list will have to report a variety of financial information, including costs associated with production the drug; rebates and coups offered; and profits earned from the drug. Regulations for reporting the information are still pending.

Will the OPDP pass on dessert at Thanksgiving Dinner? OPDP is on pace to issue a record low number of letters this year. So far, only two letters have been issued. In 2016, the agency issued five in the first six months, then in December, it issued six more. The letter count has steadily declined over the last sixteen years. Will 2017 will be a record low?

On the social media front, Twitter upped its character limit to 280, and according to social media manager, Andrew Grojean, pharmaceutical marketers should take advantage of the expanded word count. Grojean says the change does not solve all the issues related to use of the platform, but it provides more freedom and flexibility, as well as more space for the required fair balance.

Did Eli Lilly over stuff the turkey? A recently unsealed whistle blower case alleges that the company provided kickbacks to boost sales of its drugs. According to the suit, the company offered nursing services to HCPs through a third-party to induce doctors to prescribe three of its drugs. Allegedly, the nurses essentially acted as sales reps even though they were supposed to be providing independent medical advice and disease state education.

With that, we end this holiday edition of the Compliance News in Review. In the spirit of the season, we are thankful to all who take the time to read our tome on a regular basis, and as always, we invite you to contact our editor, Sean Murphy, with your feedback. He can be reached at smurphy@nxlevelsolutions.com.

Have a fun and festive Thanksgiving holiday!