American Medical Colleges (AAMC), which has been pushing for “reform” for several years, endorses Pfizer’s position. The AAMC recently released its task force report on industry funding of medical education, which calls for the end of industry supported pro grams among a long list of other restrictions. Upon release of the Pfizer statement, the Coalition for Healthcare Communication released its own statement, calling Pfizer’s decision to eliminate direct funding of CME through “independent commercial providers” an “honest but misguided attempt to blunt public criticism of commercial support.” (Please turn to page 10 to read the coalition’s full statement.) Others believe that the Pfizer decision may in fact muddy the waters if the intent is to provide more transparency because now it may be more difficult to “follow the money.” According to Ms. Gretton, Pfizer’s announcement has rattled a lot of CME providers and professionals and some say it may result in short term pullback in pharma’s direct funding of MECC sponsored CME pro grams. This recent turn of events could be considered another blow to CME provider companies, which have been treading water for several years in an attempt to stay afloat amid ever increasing regulatory guidelines and sponsor pullback. To weather the cur rent storm, CME providers need to remain committed to providing the highest integrity content and maintaining a presence in the market. Taren Grom Editor Turbulent waters LETTER FROMTHE EDITOR Shock waves swept through the CME community in early July as news spread about Pfizer’s decision to end direct financial support for CME provided by medical education and communication companies (MECCs). It has been reported that in the first half of 2008, about 17% of CME grants went to MECCs. According to industry sources, Pfizer’s CME budget, which was $80 million in 2007, will not change because of the new funding restrictions. According to Pfizer, the company is adopting a different approach to its support for CME for several reasons, but primarily to address concerns about industry’s involvement in supporting CME organized by commercial entities, as opposed to noncommercial entities. This is the latest in a series of steps taken by the drug maker to improve transparency and to mitigate the perception of a conflict of interest. It’s important to note that Pfizer’s policy does not preclude indirect support for commercial CME companies. That’s because the academic centers and medical associations that it supports may contract with CME companies. According to Cathryn Clary, M.D., VP of U.S. external medical affairs at Pfizer, the distinction is that Pfizer is not directly making payments to the MECCs. In speaking with Carolyn Gretton, VIEW editor, Dr. Clary expressed her belief that the best route for pharma over the long term is to adopt open multisource funding of CME programs, where pharma provides the CME money to the academic institutions and medical societies, and they then use some or all of that money to contract with MECCs that pro duce high quality programs with impeccable standards and unquestionable objectivity. (Please turn to page 11 to read more from Pfizer’s Dr. Clary.) The response from various associated entities within the CME world has been, as one would expect, mixed. The Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC), which Taren Grom Will CME providers have a tough road ahead? Only time will tell. 3 VIEW on Medical Education August 20 08 PUBLISHER Lisa Banket EDITOR Taren Grom CREATIVE DIRECTOR Marah Walsh EDITORS Carolyn Gretton Denise Myshko Kim Ribbink DESIGN ASSOCIATE Cathy Liszewski NATIONAL ACCOUNT MANAGER Cathy Tracy SALES REPRESENTATIVE Kate Guerrierro Copyright 2008 by PharmaLinx LLC, Titusville, NJ Printed in the U.S.A. Volume Six, Number Four VIEW is published as a special issue to Pharma VOICE, which is published monthly except August and December, by PharmaLinx LLC, P.O. Box 327, Titusville, NJ 08560. Periodicals postage paid at Titusville, NJ 08560 and additional mailing offices. Postmaster: Send address changes to PharmaVOICE, P.O. Box 292345, Kettering, OH 454290345. VIEW and PharmaVOICE Coverage and Distribution: Domestic subscriptions are available at $190 for one year (10 issues plus VIEWs). Foreign subscriptions: 10 issues plus VIEWs US$360. Contact PharmaLinx at P.O. Box 327, Titusville, NJ 08560. Call us at 609.730.0196 or FAX your order to 609.730.0197. Contributions: The VIEW and PharmaVOICE are not responsible for unsolicited contributions of any type. Unless otherwise agreed in writing, The VIEW and PharmaVOICE retain all rights on material published in The VIEW and PharmaVOICE for a period of six months after publication and reprint rights after that period expires. Email: [email protected]. Change of address: Please allow six weeks for a change of address. Send your new address along with your sub scription label to PharmaVOICE, P.O. Box 292345, Kettering, OH 454290345. Call us at 800.607.4410 or FAX your change to 937.890.0221. Email: [email protected]. IMPORTANT NOTICE: The post office will not forward copies of this magazine. The VIEW and PharmaVOICE are not responsible for replacing undelivered copies due to lack of or late notification of address change Advertising in VIEW or PharmaVOICE: To advertise in a VIEW or PharmaVOICE please contact our Advertising Department at P.O. Box 327, Titusville, NJ 08560, or telephone us at 609.730.0196. Email: [email protected]. www.pharmavoice.com Volume 6 . Number 4 Send your letters to feedback@pharma linx.com. Please include your name, title, company, and business phone number. Letters chosen for publication may be edited for length and clarity. All submissions become the property of PharmaLinx LLC. VIEW ON MEDICAL EDUCATION A SUPPORTING PUBLICATIONTO PHARMAVOICE

Download PDF