Rules

No unsubstantiated drug-to-drug safety/effectiveness comparison

No superiority suggestion via 'does not contain'/potency claims absent adequate support

Superiority claims require a study designed to establish superiority

Accurately represent study results relied upon

Disclose material study design/methodology factors

Disclose material limitations of study design, methodology, and results

Rx drug ad: effectiveness claims must be balanced by comparable risk information (502(n))

Repeated effectiveness claims in the risk section may dilute required side-effect emphasis

Prescription-drug ad may lack fair balance if side-effect prominence trails efficacy

Facing pages must be clearly marked as one continuous advertisement

Ads targeting a selected patient class may lack fair balance if class-specific risks/dosage are not adequately emphasized

Ad may be misleading if a page/spread lacks risk info or prominent locator reference

Disclose unfavorable or inconsistent findings, not just favorable results

Include related FDA-required labeling data for context when presenting related new information

Risk information should increase as benefit information increases

Treat risk information comparably to benefit information throughout

Include risk information in the main part of the piece

Present risk information in the same parts of the piece as benefits

Complete separation of benefit and risk information lacks appropriate prominence

Make risk information comparably noticeable as benefit information

FDA may object to substantially smaller font for risk information

Use similar type styles for risk and benefit information

Do not give benefit information greater contrast than risk information

Make risk information comparably readable as benefit information

FDA may object to risk information in a difficult-to-read font size

Effectiveness claims in Rx drug ads must state specific approved indications

Ads for post-1962-NDA/1969-NADA/§572-index drugs may not suggest unapproved uses

Literature may not suggest unapproved conditions of use (Rx drugs)

Fixed-combination Rx ads limit indication to concomitant-therapy patients

Dosage safe for one patient class may not be implied safe/effective for another

Update promotional labeling and advertising promptly after a labeling change

Communication must not suggest an indication different from labeling

Communication must not suggest use outside approved patient population

Communication must not conflict with labeled use limitations or handling directions

Communication must not conflict with labeled dosing, regimen, route, or strength

Communication is not consistent with labeling if it increases potential for harm relative to labeling

Communication is not consistent when labeling does not enable safe and effective use as suggested

Untrue information in one part of an ad cannot be cured by truth elsewhere

Misleading omissions in prescription drug ads require added qualification within that part/theme

Ad must not omit facts material to its representations or to use consequences

No presenting since-invalidated favorable information as current

No literature/quotations more favorable than the evidence supports

No selective presentation of information to suggest greater safety than demonstrated

No overstating the generalizability of a single study's experience

Disclose when effectiveness claims may reflect concomitant therapy

Disclose placebo-effect info when citing studies for human drug effectiveness

No favorable authority quote without disclosing later or concurrent unfavorable data

No quoting or paraphrasing out of context to mislead

No misleading pooled statistics in prescription drug advertising

No Erroneous Use of "No Significant Difference" to Claim Equivalence

No misleading headlines, subheadlines, or graphics in prescription drug ads

Statistical significance should not be used to imply unproven clinical significance

Average results should disclose the range of variation

Retrospective statistical mining to find unsupported findings may mislead

Don't use retrospective stats to imply rigor for unsuited study designs

Tables and graphs must not distort study relationships or trends

No falsely presenting reports/opinions as authentic or authoritative

Communications should not overstate study findings

Do not imply statistical rigor (e.g., via p-values) that the analysis lacks

Disclosing limitations does not cure a claim based on an inadequate study

Claims should not rest on speculation, belief, or a poorly designed or conducted study

A deceptive net impression can be misleading even when individual claims are not

Use risk language comprehensible to the same audience as benefit language

Use headlines/signals for risk information whenever benefit information is signaled

Risk information should be preceded by a signal indicating risk information follows

Match specificity of risk statements to benefit statements

Risk wording should not minimize the severity of a risk event

Risk ordering should not falsely suggest a risk applies only to certain populations or conditions

Vocalize, visualize, or place concurrent SUPERs for required claim qualifiers

Qualifying SUPERs should appear close enough to the claim they qualify

Do not rely on a single line of text for complex qualifying information

Make SUPERs reasonably visible under typical viewing conditions

SUPERs should remain on screen long enough to be read and understood

Distracting graphics during risk presentations should be avoided

Risk-related SUPERs should not compete with unrelated SUPERs on screen

Material study limitations should be disclosed

A risk-information presentation should not open with unrelated content

No fanciful name implying unique effectiveness of a common substance

Inert/inactive ingredients may not be featured to overstate their value

No proprietary name confusable with another drug's name

Established name must accompany proprietary name each time featured in prescription drug ads

Established name must appear with proprietary name in running text

Established name sizing in detailed running-text columns, incl. larger-type proviso

Relationship between proprietary and established name must be made clear

Established-name lettering ≥ half size of featured proprietary name in Rx drug ads

Established name must have prominence commensurate with the proprietary name

Place quantitative ingredient info with prominent proprietary name for unnamed drug mixtures

Quantitative ingredient info prominence must reasonably relate to proprietary name prominence

Listing of established names required with prominent display of shared combination name

Combination-ingredient ads: dosage form name and adjacent 502(n) quantities

Other dosage forms need quantitative info equal in prominence to name listing

Avoid intervening matter that de-emphasizes or obscures the established name

Established name prominence must be commensurate with proprietary name prominence

Print: established name once per page or spread suffices for featured proprietary name

Print: established name once per page or spread when running text spans multiple pages

Print: multi-column use of proprietary name allows established name once per page or spread

Audiovisual/broadcast headline: place established name in conjunction with proprietary name's most prominent display

Established name should be on screen as long as the proprietary name

Radio/telephone ads: established name conjoined with most prominent presentation suffices

Digital: established name once per web page where proprietary name most prominent suffices

Combination products: active ingredients should be placed directly right of or below proprietary name

Combination products: avoid intervening matter between proprietary name and active-ingredient information

Combination products: active ingredients should get commensurate emphasis and contrast

Established name should accompany proprietary name at its most prominent web-page display

Audiovisual supers: established name should accompany prominent proprietary-name display

Established name must accompany proprietary name presentation in radio/telephone ads

Do Not Claim Investigational Drug Is Safe or Effective in Promotional Context

Do Not Otherwise Promote an Investigational Drug

No Commercial Distribution or Test Marketing of an Investigational Drug

No Test Marketing of an Investigational Drug

Prescription drug ads need true brief summary, with broadcast alternative

Broadcast ads need a brief summary or adequate provision for labeling access

DTC TV/radio major statement must be clear, conspicuous, and neutral

Major statement must use consumer-friendly, understandable language

Major statement audio must be at least as understandable as rest of the ad

On-screen major statement text must remain readable for a sufficient duration

In TV-format DTC ads, major statement text must be easily readable

No audio/visual elements may interfere with comprehension of major statement

Reminder ads are limited to specified content only

Each specific side effect and contraindication in labeling must be disclosed

Grouped side-effect terms allowed only if previously approved for that use

An ad fails the true-statement test if false or misleading on safety/effectiveness

General group terms may not replace required specific side-effect disclosure

FDA recommends stating the most important risk information first, especially in print

Risk information should not be presented in only one location of the piece

Promotional pieces should reveal risks material to the specific benefit claims made

Risk information should not appear only on a brief summary page

Ads with unpublicized fatality/serious-damage information require prior FDA approval once FDA so notifies

No unsubstantiated superiority claims (better, more effective, safer, broader use)

No implying clinical significance from nonclinical/animal/in-vitro data alone

Cited literature/references must actually support the claim made

No using data from off-label dosages to support favorable claims

Favorable claims from an inadequately designed study may be misleading

Statistical analyses inconsistent with established statistical principles may be misleading

Mechanism-of-action claims not generally established may be misleading without disclosure

Data relied on must be scientifically appropriate and statistically sound