Use of patient case studies
"Case studies" should describe a patient that is typical of the illness and response to treatment and not an extreme example. The case study should focus on living with the disease; it is not appropriate for the patient to mention an AstraZeneca product or competitor products. Patients should be briefed and contracted in a similar way to health professionals.
Consider the following scenario:
In the UK Bayer ran a disease awareness campaign on erectile dysfunction called ‘SortEDin10’. Bayer marketed Levitra for erectile dysfunction. As part of the campaign they had a celebrity spokesperson (a famous sports personality) who had suffered from erectile dysfunction. During the campaign Bayer facilitated an interview with the BBC and briefed the celebrity on talking about his condition. The BBC News website (open to the general public) published an interview with the celebrity. During the interview the celebrity was quoted as saying the following:
‘The impotence drug Viagra did not help me and I found an alternative called Cialis did not have very quick results, but a drug called Levitra suited my lifestyle. I took it and within 15 minutes I could be in action. If you take one of these drugs you do not get an erection immediately’
Which of the following do you agree with?
- This could be considered as promotion of Levitra to the public
- This was the celebrity’s opinion. If he was not briefed to say it then Bayer is not responsible
- The celebrity should not have mentioned brand names in this way
- This statement is disparaging to Viagra
- This statement could have encouraged members of the public to ask for a prescription for Levitra
Ruling
Pfizer (who market Viagra) complained that this statement was disparaging to Viagra and this was upheld. The Panel stated that, although the celebrity was giving his personal opinion, Bayer would have known his views and knew that he took Levitra. They arranged the interview and were therefore responsible for what their celebrity spokesperson had said.
