So I work in advertising specifically focused on pharmaceutical brands. One of my client drugs has a problem where Pharmacists are dispensing as generic where their drug has a different Mechanism of Action and is only prescribed after the generic fails. Pharmacists can actually be incentivized in some cases to give the generic when the brand-name is written. Apparently they don't even have to tell you that they're switching it.
We have multiple clients who are undertaking 'dispense as written' campaigns with healthcare professionals to offset that.
I'm certainly not saying that it is ALWAYS the case that a drug which vs. generic is the best choice. Sometimes they are literally the exact same molecule.
Sometimes though, you're not getting the same level of care. Sometimes not even the same mechanism of action.
I imagine an insurance company's position on that might be the offsetting of liability. If a pharmacist dispenses a generic when the brand-name is different and the treatment fails the insurance company bears the cost of that in the form of extended care. (and possibly other things)
If it has a different mechanism of action it is a different drug. It sounds like your campaign is just more marketing by the pharmaceutical industry which is illegal in most countries.
That's right. It is actually pretty shocking (to me personally) that there are Pharmacists in the USA who are able to legally give DRUG-B when the prescription written is DRUG-A and they are different molecules, different MOA and they Pharmacists are incentivized to do that.
It is a different molecule. It has a different Mechanism of Action and the pharmacists STILL legally deliver a biosimilar version of a different drug and not only is it legal, they are rewarded for it.
I'm a programmer and in the strategy meeting where I first learned that I asked about three times if that was true. I was stunned and mildly infuriated - but all the other people in the room were just sort of tight-lip wide eyed nodding at me. "yes that is actually what happens"
It's part of the reason why we're focusing on DAW campaigns for so many brands right now. Pharmacies are a "wild west"
Now this is a difference between "Generic" and "Biosimilar" - which I may have used an inaccurate term in my previous post.
> Unlike generic medicines in which the active ingredients are identical to the reference small–molecule drug, biosimilars will not be identical to the reference biologics. ... A generic drug, by legal definition, is an exact copy of its reference medicine and must have the same chemical structure.
Generics must be the exact same molecule.
I definitely know we have numerous common cases of our client's drug being written as BRANDED-DRUG-A and the generic version of BRANDED-DRUG-B is given. Our client owns both A & B.
We have multiple clients who are undertaking 'dispense as written' campaigns with healthcare professionals to offset that.
I'm certainly not saying that it is ALWAYS the case that a drug which vs. generic is the best choice. Sometimes they are literally the exact same molecule.
Sometimes though, you're not getting the same level of care. Sometimes not even the same mechanism of action.
I imagine an insurance company's position on that might be the offsetting of liability. If a pharmacist dispenses a generic when the brand-name is different and the treatment fails the insurance company bears the cost of that in the form of extended care. (and possibly other things)