Moving somatic gene editing to the clinic: routes to market access and reimbursement in Europe.

Somatic gene editing (SGE) holds great promise for making genetic therapy possible for many monogenic conditions very soon. Is our current system of European market authorization and reimbursement ready for the expected tsunami of gene therapies? At a recent workshop of the Netherlands ZonMw consortium on ethical, legal, and social implications of personalized medicine, we discussed the current possibilities for bringing new gene therapies to the clinic. In Europe, it is not yet clear whether the route via the European medicines agency as an advanced therapy medicinal product is the most appropriate for evaluation of highly personalized SGE applications, although this may optimally guarantee safety and effectiveness. Compassionate use may ensure faster access than the centralized procedure but does not stimulate the commercial development of products. Prescription to named patients may only provide adequate access for single patients. Temporary authorization of use may allow access to medication half a year before formal market authorization has been granted, but may also have large budget impacts. Magistral compounding under a hospital exemption may be an attractive solution for rare, tailor-made applications at an acceptable price. To approve local experimental use of a therapy on a case-by-case basis may be fast, but does not guarantee optimal safety, effectiveness, and broad implementation. We argue that alternative routes should be considered for products developed for a market of large groups of patients versus unique personalized treatments. A balance between scientific evidence for safety and effectiveness, affordability, and fast access may demand a range of alternative solutions.

Truth-in-Advertising Laws: Are They Working? A Cross-Sectional Analysis of a "Plastic Surgeon" Patient Search Simulation.

BACKGROUND: Non-board-certified plastic surgeons performing cosmetic procedures and advertising as plastic surgeons may have an adverse effect on a patient's understanding of their practitioner's medical training and patient safety. The authors aim to assess (1) the impact of city size and locations and (2) the impact of health care transparency acts on the ratio of board-certified and non-American Board of Plastic Surgeons physicians. METHODS: The authors performed a systematic Google search for the term "plastic surgeon [city name]" to simulate a patient search of online providers. Comparisons of board certification status between the top hits for each city were made. Data gathered included city population, regional location, practice setting, and states with the passage of truth-in-advertising laws. RESULTS: One thousand six hundred seventy-seven unique practitioners were extracted. Of these, 1289 practitioners (76.9 percent) were American Board of Plastic Surgery-certified plastic surgeons. When comparing states with truth-in-advertising laws and states without such laws, the authors found no significant differences in board-certification rates among "plastic surgery" practitioners (88.9 percent versus 92.0 percent; p = 0.170). There was a significant difference between board-certified "plastic surgeons" versus out-of-scope practitioners on Google search between large, medium, and small cities (100 percent versus 92.9 percent versus 86.5; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Non-board-certified providers tend to localize to smaller cities. Truth-in-advertising laws have not yet had an impact on the way a number of non-American Board of Plastic Surgery-certified practitioners market themselves. There may be room to expand the scope of truth-in-advertising laws to the online world and to smaller cities.

Marketing of healthcare services in Denmark: the concept of misleading advertising.

As severe ill and incurable patients can be easy victims of misleading advertising activities for dangerous and non-effective healthcare treatments, the marketing of healthcare services are in many jurisdictions legislations tightly regulated. This article reviews the Danish regulation on marketing of healthcare services to identify which types of advertising activities that are legal. As the legislation only allows healthcare authorities to control the marketing and not the content and quality of the marketed healthcare services, their ability to intervene in serious cases of misleading advertising is limited. Misleading advertising are statements with the purpose to exaggerate or underestimate the effects and risks of healthcare services or to prevent patients from seeking conventional medical treatments. From a public health perspective, there is a need for a common EU legislation for regulation of the marketing of healthcare services as the increasing use of information technologies makes it possible for the providers to access consumers and patients directly across countries and legal systems.

Australian regulation of autologous human cell and tissue products: implications for commercial stem cell clinics.

In 2018, Australia's Therapeutic Goods Administration introduced regulatory reforms that set stricter criteria around the regulation of products derived from a patient's own cells and tissues, posing significant implications for clinics offering stem cell treatments. We review the regulatory framework and discuss its potential commercial implications, including the ambiguities that may arise from it in practice, as well as the likely impact it will have on product development and advertising practices in the future.

[Direct-to-consumer genetic testing: a regulation by the market, or a medical regulation?] / Les tests génétiques en libre accès - Régulation par le marché, ou régulation médicale ?

The direct-to-consumer genetic testing (DTC-GT) market has been developing for about twenty years now, raising various debates, even controversies. But what about the regulation of these so-called "innovative" devices, but whose medical status is ambiguous? A first regulatory aspect is depending on the market itself, since the latter is currently subjected to a strong structuring process. A second regulatory aspect, more classical, is the legal one. While the DTC-GT status has long been unclear on European scale, a new text (a Regulation, not a Directive) is modifying the situation. It encourages regulation "by the market" rather than "by the medical profession", which does not imply that the latter will have no (indirect) impact on the DTC-GT market.

TITLE: Les tests génétiques en libre accès - Régulation par le marché, ou régulation médicale ? ABSTRACT: Le marché des auto-tests génétiques se développe depuis une vingtaine d'années, non sans soulever des débats, voire des controverses. Qu'en est-il de la régulation de ces dispositifs dits « innovants ¼, mais dont le statut médical est ambigu ? Un premier aspect régulatoire vient du marché lui-même, puisqu'il est en cours de forte structuration. Un second aspect régulatoire relève plus classiquement du juridique. Alors que le statut des auto-tests a longtemps manqué de clarté à l'échelle européenne, un nouveau texte (un Règlement, et non une Directive) change la situation. Il encourage une régulation « par le marché ¼, plutôt que « par la profession médicale ¼, ce qui n'implique pas que cette dernière n'aura aucun impact (indirect) sur le marché des auto-tests.

Rogue stem cell clinics.

Cell therapies hold significant promise for the treatment of injured or diseased musculoskeletal tissues. However, despite advances in research, there is growing concern about the increasing number of clinical centres around the world that are making unwarranted claims or are performing risky biological procedures. Such providers have been known to recommend, prescribe, or deliver so called 'stem cell' preparations without sufficient data to support their true content and efficacy. In this annotation, we outline the current environment of stem cell-based treatments and the strategies of marketing directly to consumers. We also outline the difficulties in the regulation of these clinics and make recommendations for best practice and the identification and reporting of illegitimate providers. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(2):148-154.

The direct-to-consumer market for stem cell-based interventions in Australia: exploring the experiences of patients.

The prevalence of businesses selling autologous stem cell-based interventions to patients in Australia has raised serious concerns about how weaknesses in regulation have enabled the emergence of an industry that engages in aggressive marketing of unproven treatments to patients. Little is known about how patients experience this marketing and their subsequent interactions with practitioners. This paper reports results from 15 semistructured interviews with patients and carers, and also draws upon discussion conducted with patients, carers and family members (22 participants) in a workshop setting. We explore how Australian patients and carers understand and experience these interventions, and how their presumptions about the ethics of medical practice, and the regulatory environment in Australia have conditioned their preparedness to undergo unproven treatments.

Are Australians ready for warning labels, marketing bans and sugary drink taxes? Two cross-sectional surveys measuring support for policy responses to sugar-sweetened beverages.

OBJECTIVE: To assess public support for 10 potential policy initiatives to reduce sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumption. DESIGN: A 2014 historical data set, which employed a face-to-face survey in one Australian state (study 1), provided the basis for comparison with our 2017 nationally representative, cross-sectional, computer-assisted telephone interviewing population survey (study 2). PARTICIPANTS: Study 1: South Australians, 15+ years (n=2732); study 2: Australians, 18+ years (n=3430). PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: levels of support for SSB-specific policy initiatives. For the 2017 national study (study 2), demographic characteristics, body mass index, knowledge of potential harms caused by consuming SSBs and SSB consumption were included in multivariable regression analyses. RESULTS: In 2017, all 10 potential policy initiatives received majority support (60%-88% either 'somewhat' or 'strongly' in favour). Initiatives with educative elements or focused on children received high support (>70%), with highest support observed for text warning labels on drink containers (88%) and government campaigns warning of adverse health effects (87%). Higher support was observed for SSB tax paired with using funds for obesity prevention (77%) than a stand-alone tax (60%). Support for policy initiatives was generally greater among those who believed SSB daily consumption could cause health problems in adults (4%-18% absolute difference) and/or in children (8%-26% absolute difference) and lower among SSB high consumers (7+ drinks per week; 9%-29% absolute difference). State-specific data comparison indicated increased support from 2014 to 2017 for taxation (42%vs55%; χ2=15.7, p<0.001) and graphic health warnings (52%vs68%; χ2=23.4. p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: There is strong public support for government action, particularly regulatory and educational interventions, to reduce SSB consumption, which appears to have increased since 2014. The findings suggest that framing policies as protecting children, presenting taxation of SSBs in conjunction with other obesity prevention initiatives and education focused on the harms associated with SSB consumption will increase support.

[Legal limits of (online) marketing for doctors]. / Rechtliche Grenzen des (Online-) Marketings für Ärzte.

The online marketing of physicians must be measured against the same advertising regulations as conventional marketing. In this context, the Medical Professional Code of Conduct, the Medical Products Advertising Act ("Heilmittelwerbegesetz") and the Law against Unfair Competition are particularly relevant. In addition, data and personal rights aspects have to be considered in the area of online marketing. Despite increasing liberalisation tendencies, there continue to be considerable legal advertising limits for doctors, which are outlined in this article. The relatively high number of current court rulings cited in the article also shows that there are questions yet to be clarified with regard to all regulations. The judgements, which are often strongly related to the individual cases, have not answered all questions conclusively. Nevertheless, it can be stated that the legal limits of medical marketing have never been more liberal than they are now.

A Primer on Social Media Use by Young Plastic Surgeons.

Similar to the outcry over the ethics of website marketing by physicians in the 1990s, the resistance to plastic surgeons' use of social media has been loud and vehement. Many physicians, although receptive to website marketing, view social media as too radical or unprofessional. Despite the controversy, the value of social media as a communication tool for interacting with and educating patients is supported by studies showing that 65 percent of Americans and 90 percent of young adults use social media. Many plastic surgeons have been early adopters, as reflected by the articles written to help board-certified plastic surgeons use social media in academic medicine and for their practice. However, there is little guidance for young plastic surgeons who wish to use social media for professional purposes. In this study, the authors discuss the ethics and current literature on social media use by young plastic surgeons and make recommendations for how to use social media during training and after residency graduation.

Medical Marketing in the United States, 1997-2016.

IMPORTANCE: Manufacturers, companies, and health care professionals and organizations use an array of promotional activities to sell and increase market share of their products and services. These activities seek to shape public and clinician beliefs about laboratory testing, the benefits and harms of prescription drugs, and some disease definitions. OBJECTIVE: To review the marketing of prescription drugs, disease awareness campaigns, health services, and laboratory tests and the related consequences and regulation in the United States over a 20-year period (1997-2016). EVIDENCE: Analysis (1997-2016) of consumer advertising (Kantar Media data for spending and number of ads); professional marketing (IQVIA Institute for Human Data Science, Open Payments Data [Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services]); regulations and legal actions of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Federal Trade Commission (FTC), state attorneys general, and US Department of Justice; and searches (1975-2018) of peer-reviewed medical literature (PubMed), business journals (Business Source Ultimate), and news media (Lexis Nexis) for articles about expenditures, content, and consequences and regulation of consumer and professional medical marketing. Spending is reported in 2016 dollars. FINDINGS: From 1997 through 2016, spending on medical marketing of drugs, disease awareness campaigns, health services, and laboratory testing increased from $17.7 to $29.9 billion. The most rapid increase was in direct-to-consumer (DTC) advertising, which increased from $2.1 billion (11.9%) of total spending in 1997 to $9.6 billion (32.0%) of total spending in 2016. DTC prescription drug advertising increased from $1.3 billion (79 000 ads) to $6 billion (4.6 million ads [including 663 000 TV commercials]), with a shift toward advertising high-cost biologics and cancer immunotherapies. Pharmaceutical companies increased DTC marketing about diseases treated by their drugs with increases in disease awareness campaigns from 44 to 401 and in spending from $177 million to $430 million. DTC advertising for health services increased from $542 million to $2.9 billion, with the largest spending increases by hospitals, dental centers, cancer centers, mental health and addiction clinics, and medical services (eg, home health). DTC spending on advertising for laboratory tests (such as genetic testing) increased from $75.4 million to $82.6 million, although the number of ads increased more substantially (from 14 100 to 255 300), reflecting an increase in less expensive electronic media advertising. Marketing to health care professionals by pharmaceutical companies accounted for most promotional spending and increased from $15.6 billion to $20.3 billion, including $5.6 billion for prescriber detailing, $13.5 billion for free samples, $979 million for direct physician payments (eg, speaking fees, meals) related to specific drugs, and $59 million for disease education. Manufacturers of FDA-approved laboratory tests paid $12.9 million to professionals in 2016. From 1997 through 2016, the number of consumer and professional drug promotional materials that companies submitted for FDA review increased from 34 182 to 97 252, while FDA violation letters for misleading drug marketing decreased from 156 to 11. Since 1997, 103 financial settlements between drug companies and federal and state governments resulted in more than $11 billion in fines for off-label or deceptive marketing practices. The FTC has acted against misleading marketing by a single for-profit cancer center. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Medical marketing increased substantially from 1997 through 2016, especially DTC advertising for prescription drugs and health services. Pharmaceutical marketing to health professionals accounted for most spending and remains high even with new policies to limit industry influence. Despite the increase in marketing over 20 years, regulatory oversight remains limited.

Adaptive designs in clinical trials: from scientific advice to marketing authorisation to the European Medicine Agency.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, experience on the application of adaptive designs in confirmatory clinical trials has accumulated. Although planning such trials comes at the cost of additional operational complexity, adaptive designs offer the benefit of flexibility to update trial design and objectives as data accrue. In 2007, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) provided guidance on confirmatory clinical trials with adaptive (or flexible) designs. In order to better understand how adaptive trials are implemented in practice and how they may impact medicine approval within the EMA centralised procedure, we followed on 59 medicines for which an adaptive clinical trial had been submitted to the EMA Scientific Advice (SA) and analysed previously in a dedicated EMA survey of scientific advice letters. We scrutinized in particular the submission of the corresponding medicines for a marketing authorisation application (MAA). We also discuss the current regulatory perspective as regards the implementation of adaptive designs in confirmatory clinical trials. METHODS: Using the internal EMA MAA database, the AdisInsight database and related trial registries, we analysed how many of these 59 trials actually started, the completion status, results, the time to trial start, the adaptive elements finally implemented after SA, their possible influence on the success of the trial and corresponding product approval. RESULTS: Overall 31 trials out of 59 (53%) were retrieved. Thirty of them (97%) have been started and 23 (74%) concluded. Nine of these trials (39% out of 23) demonstrated a significant treatment effect on their primary endpoint and 4 (17% out of 23) supported a marketing authorisation (MA). An additional two trials were stopped using pre-defined criteria for futility, efficiently identifying trials on which further resources should not be spent. Median time to trial start after SA letter was given by EMA was 5 months. In the investigated trial registries, at least 18 trial (58% of 31 retrieved trials) designs were implemented with adaptive elements, which were predominantly dose selection, sample size reassessment (SSR) and stopping for futility (SFF). Among the 11 completed trials including adaptive elements, 6 demonstrated a significant treatment effect on their primary endpoint (55%). CONCLUSIONS: Adaptive designs are now well established in the drug development landscape. If properly pre-planned, adaptations can play a key role in the success of some of these trials, for example to help successfully select the most promising dose regimens for phase II/III trials. Interim analyses can also enable stopping of trials for futility when they do not hold their promises. Type I error rate control, trial integrity and results consistency between the different stages of the analyses are fundamental aspects to be discussed thoroughly. Engaging early dialogue with regulators and implementing the scientific advice received is strongly recommended, since much experience in discussing adaptive designs and assessing their results has been accumulated.