Standards for pharmaceutical advertising in Canada

We thank Ray Chepesiuk for identifying important differences between Canada and the United States in the regulation of pharmaceutical advertisements and applaud the Canadian effort. Canadian regulations with regard to prerelease review of advertisements are unquestionably more stringent. We are concerned, however, that in neither country is the regulatory effort adequate to ensure that all of the relevant information is available to those making decisions about the effectiveness and cost- effectiveness of medications.¹ Although the pharmaceutical industry's recent commitment² to make all clinically relevant trial data available on an industry-sponsored Web site (www.clinicalstudyresults.org) may help in this regard, at present much relevant material remains unpublished, and peer-reviewed publications often fail to tell the whole story.³ Trial registry with electronic publication of research protocols before inception of each trial^4,5 and Web posting of complete data sets upon publication of the findings are 2 measures that could promote greater comprehensiveness and honesty in the reporting of trials.

Even if these measures are enacted, clinicians should remember that advertising exists to create a demand for a product and that claims made in advertisements may or may not be true. It is therefore imperative that all relevant information is on the table before clinicians and patients make decisions about the utility of medications. Despite increasing regulation, more remains to be done, and “caveat emptor” still applies.

Richelle J. Cooper David L. Schriger UCLA Emergency Center UCLA School of Medicine Los Angeles, Calif.