States do not have the right to prevent drug companies from using information about prescription sales in marketing campaigns targeting physicians, the United States Supreme Court decided in a 6-3 vote Thursday.
The court struck down a Vermont law that blocked the use of such prescription drug data, saying the law violated drug companies' right to speak freely about the benefits of their products.
The majority wrote: "the First Amendment directs us to be especially skeptical of regulations that seek to keep people in the dark for what the government perceives to be their own good." They said the issue has "great relevance in the fields of medicine and public health, where information can save lives."
The American Medical Association issued a press release saying that physicians who object to the high court's decision can enroll in the AMA's free Physician Data Restriction Program, "which enables physicians to 'opt out' of such disclosure quickly and easily, while still allowing their data to be available for academic and governmental research." Some 28,000 U.S. physicians have used the PDRP to restrict their data, the AMA said.
The AMA said "We believe the PDRP balances individual physician concerns regarding prescription data with First Amendment freedoms and the fundamental public interest in robust medical research."
It added that "While the AMA supports the appropriate disclosure of prescriber data, the AMA firmly believes that every physician has the unequivocal right to decide whether his or her individual prescribing data is shielded from pharmaceutical detailers."
The Supreme Court took up the issue in Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc., a company that describes itself as "the leading provider of information services for the healthcare industry around the world."
In a statement posted on its website, IMS said the court banned "the voluntary exchange of information on a matter of public importance – improperly restricting the rights of others from using information about physicians' prescribing practices. Existing laws in Maine and New Hampshire also will likely be declared unconstitutional or repealed in light of this Supreme Court decision."
Having aggregated data on prescription sales is useful to distribute information about safety concerns or product recalls and to conduct research.
IMS Health said in the statement on its website: "We are pleased with today's decision. Patients have a critical interest in ensuring that their doctors are fully informed about all current treatment options that could save or meaningfully improve their lives."
"This decision helps get cutting-edge information to physicians and helps advance the research and development of new breakthroughs," said Sharon Terry, president and CEO of Genetic Alliance, a nonprofit health advocacy organization networking more than 10,000 disease-specific advocacy organizations and healthcare entities.