Pharmaceutical companies spend about twice as much on marketing their drugs every year as they do on research and development of new medications. And it’s a pretty impressive marketing budget. The Wall Street Journal recently reported how marketing numbers broke down last year. The figures don’t include the value of free drug samples that companies distribute – the largest single marketing expense.
The other major categories include:
$12 billionfor “detailing,” the industry term for sending sales reps to talk to doctors, nurses and other providers. Spending on detailing was highest for statins (such as Pfizer’s Lipitor), antidepressants (like Forest’s Lexapro) and antipsychotics (like Bristol-Myers Squibb’s Abilify). In each of those categories, branded drugs are competing against generics for a big market.
$4.7 billion for Direct-To-Consumer (“Ask your doctor”) advertising, and an additional $400 millionon advertising in professional journals. TV ads accounted for almost 62% of drug company ad spending, print ads made up 35% and online ads 4%.
$3.4 billionfor sponsoring professional meetings and events. This includes sponsoring courses and talks that doctors can attend (or watch online) in order to satisfy requirements for continuing medical education (known as CME). Industry-funding of CME has been getting some negative attention lately, with some physicians and academics calling for public disclosure of who pays for what.
And speaking of doctors, New Hampshire physician Dr. Kevin Pho writes in his always-enlightening blog KevinMD, about a type of pharmaceutical sales rep whose actions remain completely unregulated.
“These reps have unfettered access to the top academics of all fields of medicine, are invited by medical societies to give keynote addresses, routinely publish articles in the best journals, and offer advice about medications that is accepted as gospel by doctors everywhere. These reps have medical degrees, and some have become millionaires by taking fat payments from drug companies. The are “the hired guns of medicine”.
A revealing study presented at the American College of Preventive Medicine annual meeting byDr. Mohammed Hassan Murad of Mayo Clinic reviewed 202 published medical journal articles that addressed the known association between heart attack risk and the GlaxoSmithKline diabetes drug, Avandia. Among journal article authors who concluded Avandia does NOT increase the risk, 86% had financial relationships with GlaxoSmithKline. Among authors of articles offering unfavorable reviews, only 18% had relationships with GSK.
Read the entire Wall Street Journal article on drug marketing numbers.
For a measly $200,000 (truly a drop in the drug bucket when you consider that Big Pharma is a $235 billion industry) the pharmaceutical company Forest Laboratories, Inc. decided to add some medical muscle to its Paid Media Outreach for the anti-depressant drugLexapro. Forest Labs’ plan was to write ‘bylined articles’ with the collaboration of ‘thought leaders‘ to push sales. The New York Times has released a copy of this marketing plan, including these gems:
“Bylined articles will allow us to fold Lexapro messages into articles on depression, anxiety, and co-morbidity developed by (or ghostwritten for) thought leaders. We will identify a Lexapro thought leader to place 1-3 bylined articles in trade journals, consumer publications and on the Internet. Estimated costs include article development, revisions and honoraria for the authors. Examples of topics include co-morbidity of depression and anxiety and selectivity. Continue reading →