Sociology of pharmaceuticals development and regulation: a realist empirical research programme

Capitalizing on Hope: Questionable Marketing Approval and Pricing of a New ALS Drug

Regulatory agencies must balance patient demands to access new treatments for fatal diseases with limited treatment options while ensuring drug safety and efficacy. However, questionable U.S. regulatory actions resulted in the early approval of AMX0035 to treat amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) by reconvening advisory commissions to obtain positive decisions and designating the drug as a new molecular entity. Data from one randomized clinical trial suggests minimal delays in disease progression and longer survivability, but debate remains about the lack of confirmatory evidence of effectiveness owing to study limitations. A patient's decision-making process details the experience of using the drug, including perspectives on access, cost, effectiveness, and adverse effects. In line with the "nichebuster" business model, the drugmaker, Amylyx Pharmaceuticals, is charging US$158,000/year/patient and thus forecast to turn a profit on a drug with debatable clinical effectiveness prior to completing a Phase 3 trial. Early marketing approval, despite community demands, is unnecessary and may have reduced access because of the end of a compassionate use program, and the high price tag results in restricted coverage and high out-of-pocket costs. Also, the drug's key ingredients are available as a generic and a supplement.

Demedication without demedicalization? Redefining the medical and economic boundaries of veterinary professional jurisdiction

Veterinarians' professional jurisdiction is nowadays facing major challenges. Regulatory changes in the prescribing and dispensing of medicines, which have historically been at the heart of veterinary jurisdiction, could fragilize the medical power of this professional group. This article analyses the practices and strategies deployed by veterinarians to preserve and readapt their jurisdiction, by discussing recent work in sociology of professions and reflecting on how the case of veterinarians could help rethink the contrasting case of human doctors. This article is based on two field studies in France (in diverse livestock sectors) made of more than 40 interviews and 70 h of ethnographic observation of veterinary activity. We first show how veterinarians' jurisdiction over medicines was built up and how their professional autonomy is put under pressure by recent injunctions to demedicate livestock and to develop preventive approaches to animal health. We then detail how the economic and medical boundaries of veterinary jurisdiction are being redefined through dynamics of protocolization and contractualization of care which allow veterinarians to impose themselves as health managers. Finally, we demonstrate that this situation favors the emergence of new forms of professional legitimacy based on an "evidence-based veterinary medicine" that their competitors cannot contest, and on the development of economic infrastructures that supports and makes it possible to monetize this new professional expertise. Finally, this article discusses contemporary processes of medical professionalization. It argues that, unlike human medicine, veterinary medicine has been able to maintain its professional power even if its historical jurisdiction has been reshaped. This has required a redefinition of professional activity both as a medical (i.e. approaches to animal health) and economic (i.e. business model of veterinary companies) practice.

Regulatory scripting: Stakeholder participation in food and drug administration medical device advisory meetings

In an age of biomedicalization, medical devices have become more common and more technologically complicated, and adverse events associated with medical devices have increased. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) relies on advisory panels to assist in regulatory decision making regarding medical devices. Public meetings held by these advisory panels allow stakeholders to testify, presenting evidence and recommendations, according to careful procedural standards. This research examines the participation of six stakeholder groups (patients, advocates, physicians, researchers, industry representatives and FDA representatives) in FDA panel meetings focused on the safety of implantable medical devices between 2010-2020. We use qualitative and quantitative methods to analyze speakers' opportunities for participation, bases of evidence, and recommendations, applying the concept of 'scripting' to understand how this participation is shaped by regulatory structures. Regression analysis demonstrates statistically significant differences in speaking time, where researchers, industry, and FDA representatives had longer opening remarks and more exchanges with FDA panelists than patients. Patients, advocates and physicians shared the least amount of speaking time, and were the parties most likely to leverage patients' embodied knowledge and recommend the most stringent regulatory actions like recalls. Meanwhile, researchers, FDA, and industry representatives rely on scientific evidence and, with physicians, recommend actions that preserve medical technology access and clinical autonomy. This research highlights the scripted nature of public participation and the types of knowledge considered in medical device policymaking.

The challenge of institutionalised complicity: Researching the pharmaceutical industry in the era of impact and engagement

The pharmaceutical industry plays a central role in the production of the drugs we use to treat most illnesses. It is immensely powerful and has received sustained attention from sociologists of health and illness, who have provided a critique of its influence and sometimes unethical behaviour. However, in recent years, funders are increasingly expecting researchers to engage and collaborate with stakeholders, including industry. This raises important questions about the institutionalisation of complicity and the different forms this might take. This article asks: How can sociologists engage with the pharmaceutical industry in a positive and constructive manner, whilst remaining independent, principled and critical? It will draw on my experience of establishing a major project on high-priced drugs for rare diseases and the literature on collaboration, stakeholder engagement and responsible research to propose a methodological framework to address this challenge. This is based on six PRIMES: (normative) Principles, Reflection and Independence, (field) Mapping, (careful) Engagement and Strategic intervention that have broad applications to many other areas of contemporary social science research.

Socio-historical analysis of the social importance of pharmacovigilance

Pharmacovigilance is a scientific discipline that has changed a lot in recent years and is of great social importance. The case of the so-called sulfonamide elixir showed society the importance of this discipline. Since then, pharmacovigilance has evolved into a scientific discipline with a strong social character. In this paper, a historical review is made of several paradigmatic examples of this discipline to reflect on what pharmacovigilance could be like finally. We conclude that this discipline could be more closely related to other areas of the social sciences, which would help to promote a more democratic social environment taking into account the needs of individuals and social groups.

Pharmaceutical drug development: high drug prices and the hidden role of public funding

In 2019, the record for the most expensive drug was broken at US$2.1 million per patient. The high costs of new drugs are justified by the pharmaceutical industry as the expense required for maintaining research and development (R&D) pipelines. However, this does not take into account that globally the public pays for between one to two-thirds of upfront R&D costs through taxpayers or charitable donations. Governments are effectively paying twice for medicines; first through R&D, and then paying the high prices upon approval. High drug prices distort research priorities, emphasising financial gains and not health gains. In this manuscript, issues surrounding the current patent-based drug development model, public funding of research and pharmaceutical lobbying will be addressed. Finally, innovations in drug development to improve public health needs and guaranteeing medication access to patients will be explored.

Revisiting the pharmaceuticalisation of pandemic influenza using Lukes' framework of power

The power of social actors to drive or block pharmaceutical uptake has been a concern in sociological debates on pharmaceuticalisation, including in the case of pandemic vaccination. We build on Steven Lukes' three-dimensional view of power to explore the 2009 H1N1 pandemic vaccination in Sweden and Denmark - two similar countries that arrived at conflicting vaccination strategies. Drawing on interviews with members of each country's pandemic steering group and on document analysis, we explore three consecutive stages of pandemic vaccination response: planning, vaccine procurement and the vaccination campaign. The paper makes two contributions to studies of pharmaceuticalisation and pandemics. Conceptually, we advocate the suitability of Lukes' framework over the 'countervailing powers' framework repeatedly used to model power in the pharmaceutical field. Empirically, our study confirms that government-appointed experts steered pandemic planning in both countries, but we show that the state, industry and the WHO also exerted power by enabling and constraining experts' decision-making, including by keeping some information secret. Furthermore, we argue that mass vaccination in Sweden was a pervasive expression of state power, in Lukes' sense, since it rested on keeping latent the tension between many individuals' health interests and the state's interests in protecting social and economic functioning.

The Emerging Social Science Literature on Health Technology Assessment: A Narrative Review

BACKGROUND

Social scientists have paid increasing attention to health technology assessment (HTA). This paper provides an overview of existing social scientific literature on HTA, with a focus on sociology and political science and their subfields.

METHODS

Narrative review of key pieces in English.

RESULTS

Three broad themes recur in the emerging social science literature on HTA: the drivers of the establishment and concrete institutional designs of HTA bodies; the effects of institutionalized HTA on pricing and reimbursement systems and the broader society; and the social and political influences on HTA decisions.

CONCLUSION

Social scientists bring a focus on institutions and social actors involved in HTA, using primarily small-N research designs and qualitative methods. They provide valuable critical perspectives on HTA, at times challenging its otherwise unquestioned assumptions. However, they often leave aside questions important to the HTA practitioner community, including the role of culture and values. Closer collaboration could be beneficial to tackle new relevant questions pertaining to HTA.

Beyond evidence versus truthiness: toward a symmetrical approach to knowledge and ignorance in policy studies

Current political developments in established liberal democracies in both Europe and North America have fundamentally called into question the normative relations between truth, knowledge and politics. Whether labeled "posttruth" or truthiness, commentators lament the willful spread and deployment of nonknowledge and ignorance as important political forces. In this paper, we discuss ignorance in its strategic dimension by weaving together insights from the sociology of ignorance with a policy-scientific approach. By means of three empirical vignettes, we demonstrate that ignorance is more than the flipside of knowledge or merely its lack: it is a constitutive feature of the policy process and is thus not uniquely symptomatic of the current era. We conclude by arguing for what we call a symmetrical approach in which ignorance receives the same quality of attention that knowledge has historically received in the policy sciences. To make fully visible the different forms of ignorance that shape policy processes, policy scholars must hone their "agnoto-epistemological sensibilities" to cope with the current challenges and advance a policy science for democracy.

Constructing contentious and noncontentious facts: How gynecology textbooks create certainty around pharma-contraceptive safety

Using critical discourse analysis, we examine how seven popular gynecology textbooks use sociolinguistic devices to describe the health effects of pharma-contraception (intrauterine and hormonal methods). Though previous studies have noted that textbooks generally use neutral language, we find that gynecology textbooks differentially deployed linguistic devices, framing pharma-contraceptive benefits as certain and risks as doubtful. These discursive strategies transform pharma-contraceptive safety into fact. We expand on Latour and Woolgar's concept of noncontentious facts by showing how some facts that are taken for granted by the medical community still require discursive fortification to counter potential negative accusations from outside the profession. We call these contentious facts. Our findings suggest that a pro-pharma orientation exists in gynecology textbooks, which may influence physicians' understanding of pharmaceutical safety. As such, these texts may affect medical practice by normalizing pharma-contraceptives without full considerations of their risks.

Changing standards for drug approval: A longitudinal analysis of conditional marketing authorisation in the European Union

Drug regulatory agencies around the world increasingly implement expedited regulatory pathways allowing for approval of medicines that intend to address unmet medical needs based on lower evidentiary standards than would be conventionally required. Few studies have investigated how companies and regulators utilise these pathways. We therefore conducted a longitudinal analysis of the emergence and implementation of the conditional marketing authorisation (CMA) instrument in the European Union. Drawing on archival documents, procedural data and interviews, we show that there was substantial ambiguity among regulators and companies about how to strike a new balance between evidentiary requirements and patient needs. As ambiguities were left unresolved, parties became reluctant to use CMA and in the majority of procedures did not use the pathway in a prospectively planned fashion. Rather, CMA became an option for regulators and companies to apply when submitted data were not strong enough to justify standard approval. Particularly, incumbent companies profited from this. The results stress the challenges of realising institutional change in drug regulation by showing how interest-driven actors can act upon ambiguities in attempts to shape regulatory outcomes and stretch rule interpretations.

Why European and United States drug regulators are not speaking with one voice on anti-influenza drugs: regulatory review methodologies and the importance of 'deep' product reviews

BACKGROUND

Relenza represents the first neuraminidase inhibitor (NI), a class of drugs that also includes the drug Tamiflu. Although heralded as breakthrough treatments in influenza, NI efficacy has remained highly controversial. A key unsettled question is why the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved more cautious efficacy statements in labelling than European regulators for both drugs.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative analysis of United States and European Union regulatory appraisals for Relenza to investigate the reasons for divergent regulatory interpretations, pertaining to Relenza's capacity to alleviate symptoms and reduce frequency of complications of influenza.

RESULTS

In Europe, Relenza was evaluated via the so-called national procedure with Sweden as the reference country. We show that FDA reviewers, unlike their European (i.e. Swedish) counterpart, (1) rejected the manufacturer's insistence on pooling efficacy data, (2) remained wary of subgroup analyses, and (3) insisted on stringent statistical analyses. These differences meant that the FDA was less likely to depart from prevailing regulatory and scientific standards in interpreting trial results. We argue that the differences are explained largely by divergent institutionalised review methodologies, i.e. the European regulator's reliance on manufacturer-compiled summaries compared to the FDA's examination of original data and documentation from trials.

CONCLUSIONS

The FDA's more probing and meticulous evaluative methodology allowed its reviewers to develop 'deep' knowledge concerning the clinical and statistical facets of trials, and more informed opinions regarding suitable methods for analysing trial results. These findings challenge the current emphasis on evaluating regulatory performance mainly in terms of speed of review. We propose that persistent uncertainty and knowledge deficits regarding NIs could have been ameliorated had regulators engaged in the public debates over the drugs' efficacy and explained their contrasting methodologies and judgments. Regulators use major resources to evaluate drugs, but if regulators' assessments are not effectively disseminated and used, resources are used inefficiently.

Regulating Information or Allowing Deception? Pharmaceutical Sales Visits in Canada, France, and the United States

Diverse legal and regulatory measures are used internationally to control the information provided during pharmaceutical sales visits. Little is known about the comparative effectiveness of these measures however. We analyzed the perceptions of regulators, pharmaceutical industry officials, health professionals, and consumer respondents concerning these approaches in Canada, France, and the United States using an empirical realist interests-based approach. Interviews focused on the aims and effectiveness of regulation, barriers and enablers to regulation and suggestions for improvement. An alignment was found in North America regulator and industry respondents' satisfaction with the status quo and their view that further intervention is unfeasible and unnecessary. Health professionals generally expressed a lack of confidence in the impact of regulations on sales visit information while consumer advocates voiced their disappointment in both regulators and health professionals for their failure to counteract the influence of pharmaceutical marketing. Regulator and industry respondents in France differed from their North American counterparts in their willingness to increase and diversify the scope of regulatory interventions. As the first international comparison of regulatory experiences in this sector, the findings highlight the universal need for more focused and inclusive discussions among groups about how to tailor regulations to achieve public health goals.

Understanding Users in the 'Field' of Medications

The numbers of medicinal drugs available for human consumption have increased rapidly in the past several decades, and physician prescribing practices reflect the growing reliance on medicines in health care. However, the nature of medicines-as-technology makes problematic taken-for-granted relationships among actors involved in the delivery, or who are the recipients of medicines-reliant health care. In this article, I situate the medicine user in the 'field' of medications-where interests, actions and outcomes are continually negotiated among and between the various players-physicians, pharmacists, government regulatory bodies, the pharmaceutical industry and users of medicines. The objective of the paper is to illuminate the complex context in which the medicine-user-the target of the pharmacy profession's service to the public-accesses and uses medicines.

Towards a genealogy of pharmacological practice

Following Foucault's work on disciplinary power and biopolitics, this article maps an initial cartography of the research areas to be traced by a genealogy of pharmacological practice. Pharmacology, as a practical activity, refers to the creation, production and sale of drugs/medication. This work identifies five lines of research that, although often disconnected from each other, may be observed in the specialized literature: (1) pharmaceuticalization; (2) regulation of the pharmaceutical industry; (3) the political-economic structure of the pharmaceutical industry; (4) consumption/consumerism of medications; (5) and bio-knowledge. The article suggests that a systematic analysis of these areas leads one to consider pharmacological practice a sui generis apparatus of power, which reaches beyond the purely disciplinary and biopolitical levels to encompass molecular configurations, thereby giving rise not only to new types of government over life, but also to new struggles for life, extending from molecular to population-wide levels.

Divergence and convergence of commercial and scientific priorities in drug development: The case of Zelmid, the first SSRI antidepressant

Based on a realist conceptualization of interests, this paper explores how commercial and scientific priorities appear to have converged and diverged during the development of the antidepressant Zelmid. The drug represents the first of the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) to reach the market. Zelmid was synthesized in 1971 and launched by the Swedish firm Astra in 1982, but subsequently withdrawn the next year because of adverse neurological effects. This paper draws on in-depth interviews with scientists representing both industry and academia who had high-level involvement in various phases of the project (experimental, pre-clinical and clinical), as well as on textual sources such as scientific articles and memoirs. Zelmid was a product of mechanism-based or "rational" drug discovery from the early 1960s and the associated intermingling of science and commerce. It is argued that both scientists and the pharmaceutical company shared an interest in embracing mechanism-based drug discovery because it simultaneously promised medico-scientific advances and profits. However, the intermingling of science and commerce also strained the relationship between scientific and commercial priorities further along the trajectory of the drug; for example, concerning issues such as dosage strategy and drug use in primary care, where corporate management allegedly took decisions contrary to the recommendations of both academic and company scientists. On such occasions the asymmetry in power became apparent in scientists' narratives: commercial considerations trumped those of science since, ultimately, decisions rest with management, not with scientists. In addition, temporality appears to be associated with the divergence of commercial and scientific priorities. While rare during experimental and pre-clinical phases, divergence was concentrated downstream to the clinical testing and post-marketing phases. It is hypothesized that a similar pattern of convergence and divergence of commercial and scientific priorities may exist in the trajectory of other drugs.

Patients' expectations of medicines--a review and qualitative synthesis

BACKGROUND

An increasing part of prescribing of medicines is done for the purpose of managing risk for disease and is motivated by clinical and economic benefit on a long-term, population level. This makes benefit from medicines less tangible for individuals. Sociology of pharmaceuticals includes personal and social perspectives in the study of how medicines are used. We use two characterizations of patients' expectations of medicines to start forming a description of how individuals conceptualize benefits from risk management medicines.

SEARCH STRATEGY AND SYNTHESIS

We reviewed the literature on patients' expectations with a focus on the influences on expectations regarding medicines prescribed for long-term conditions. Searches in Medline and Scopus identified 20 studies for inclusion, describing qualitative aspects of beliefs, views, thoughts and expectations regarding medicines.

RESULTS

A qualitative synthesis using a constant comparative thematic analysis identified four themes describing influences on expectations: a need to achieve a specific outcome; the development of experiences and evaluation over time; negative values such as dependency and social stigma; and personalized meaning of the necessity and usefulness of medicines.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings in this synthesis resonate with previous research into expectations of medicines for prevention and treatment of different conditions. However, a gap in the knowledge regarding patients' conceptualization of future benefits with medicines is identified. The study highlights suggestions for further empirical work to develop a deeper understanding of the role of patients' expectations in prescribing for long-term risk management.

Regulating drug information in Europe: a pyrrhic victory for pharmaceutical industry critics?

Informed by recent sociological debates on pharmaceuticalisation, this article examines the evolution of the current EU legal proposal on prescription drug information to patients, as well as the surrounding controversies. In 2008 the European Commission proposed the relaxation of the existing rules governing drug information provision to patients by the pharmaceutical industry. Critics of the industry's influence over health policy and markets, including consumer organisations, industry-independent patient organisations and health professionals, rejected the Commission's proposal, claiming that the industry cannot be considered a reliable source of patient information due to inherent financial conflicts of interest. Since these critics were at least partially successful in rallying opinion against the Commission proposal, they functioned as countervailing forces to promotion-driven pharmaceuticalisation. Even so, as a watered-down version of the proposal moved through the European Parliament it was further modified to ultimately resemble the Swedish system that was held up as a high-quality example of industry-based information provision. Yet this article contends that the Swedish system displays evidence of corporate bias. Significantly, basing EU policy on a drug information system not resistant to corporate bias risks creating practices that violate the legally mandated mission of EU drug regulation, which is to 'promote and protect public health'.

Dabigatran - a case history demonstrating the need for comprehensive approaches to optimize the use of new drugs

BACKGROUND

There are potential conflicts between authorities and companies to fund new premium priced drugs especially where there are safety and/or budget concerns. Dabigatran, a new oral anticoagulant for the prevention of stroke in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF), exemplifies this issue. Whilst new effective treatments are needed, there are issues in the elderly with dabigatran due to variable drug concentrations, no known antidote and dependence on renal elimination. Published studies have shown dabigatran to be cost-effective but there are budget concerns given the prevalence of AF. There are also issues with potentially re-designing anticoagulant services. This has resulted in activities across countries to better manage its use.

OBJECTIVE

To (i) review authority activities in over 30 countries and regions, (ii) use the findings to develop new models to better manage the entry of new drugs, and (iii) review the implications for all major stakeholder groups.

METHODOLOGY

Descriptive review and appraisal of activities regarding dabigatran and the development of guidance for groups through an iterative process.

RESULTS

There has been a plethora of activities among authorities to manage the prescribing of dabigatran including extensive pre-launch activities, risk sharing arrangements, prescribing restrictions, and monitoring of prescribing post-launch. Reimbursement has been denied in some countries due to concerns with its budget impact and/or excessive bleeding. Development of a new model and future guidance is proposed to better manage the entry of new drugs, centering on three pillars of pre-, peri-, and post-launch activities.

CONCLUSION

Models for introducing new drugs are essential to optimize their prescribing especially where there are concerns. Without such models, new drugs may be withdrawn prematurely and/or struggle for funding.

The politics of health technology assessment in Poland

OBJECTIVE

First, to identify risks associated with the scientific evaluation of drugs considered for state reimbursement in Poland through exploring strategies of influence employed by multinational drug companies in relation to the Agency for Health Technology Assessment (AHTAPol). Second, to ascertain whether the outcomes of drug evaluation meet the interests of the public payer in reimbursing cost-effective drugs supported by robust pharmacoeconomic evidence.

METHODOLOGY

We conducted 109 in-depth semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of stakeholders involved in the reimbursement process in Poland. We analysed four available documentary sources, including recommendations issued by the AHTAPol.

RESULTS

AHTAPol recommendations were an instrumental part of the blame avoidance strategy by political elites. Drug producers utilised direct and indirect strategies of influence. The direct strategies involved building relationships with a circle of health technology assessment analysts and medical experts working for the Agency. The indirect strategies employed leaders of opinion in the medical milieu, patient organisations, and political elites to endorse policy positions favourable to drug companies. The AHTAPol positively recommended an increasing proportion of the drugs it assessed, many of them reported as not cost-effective or supported by dubious pharmacoeconomic evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

The strategies of influence entail a number of risks that may undermine the scientific evaluation of drugs. Some outcomes of drug evaluation may favour the interests of multinational drug companies over those of the public payer. We suggest that the risks involved in drug evaluation might be mitigated through (1) professionalization of health technology assessment; (2) restriction of job seeking and post public-payer employment; (3) disclosure and management of experts' conflicts of interest; (4) institutionalisation of patient and public involvement; and (5) increased institutional separation of the AHTAPol from political elites.

Science, politics, and health in the brave new world of pharmaceutical carcinogenic risk assessment: technical progress or cycle of regulatory capture?

The carcinogenicity (cancer-inducing potential) of pharmaceuticals is an important risk factor for health when considering whether thousands of patients on drug trials or millions/billions of consumers in the marketplace should be exposed to a new drug. Drawing on fieldwork involving over 50 interviews and documentary research spanning 2002–2010 in Europe and the US, and on regulatory capture theory, this article investigates how the techno-regulatory standards for carcinogenicity testing of pharmaceuticals have altered since 1998. It focuses on the replacement of long-term carcinogenicity tests in rodents (especially mice) with shorter-term tests involving genetically-engineered mice (GEM). Based on evidence regarding financial/organizational control, methodological design, and interpretation of the validation and application of these new GEM tests, it is argued that regulatory agencies permitted the drug industry to shape such validation and application in ways that prioritized commercial interests over the need to protect public health. Boundary-work enabling industry scientists to define some standards of public-health policy facilitated such capture. However, as the scientific credibility of GEM tests as tools to protect public health by screening out carcinogens became inescapably problematic, a regulatory resurgence, impelled by reputational concerns, exercised more control over industry’s construction and use of the tests, The extensive problems with GEM tests as public-health protective regulatory science raises the spectre that alterations to pharmaceutical carcinogenicity-testing standards since the 1990s may have been boundary-work in which the political project of decreasing the chance that companies’ products are defined as carcinogenic has masqueraded as techno-science.

Desperately seeking cancer drugs: explaining the emergence and outcomes of accelerated pharmaceutical regulation

Government regulators have increasingly accelerated new cancer drugs on to the market by granting them approval based on less clinical data supporting drug efficacy than permitted under standard regulations. With more lenient regulatory standards, pharmaceutical companies have keenly sought to develop cancer drugs. Focusing on the US, this article examines how the emergence and implementation of such accelerated approvals should be understood, particularly in relation to corporate bias and disease-politics theories. Drawing on longitudinal and case study data analysis, it is argued that the emergence of accelerated approval regulations for cancer drugs should be regarded primarily as part of a deregulatory regime driven by the interests of the pharmaceutical industry in partnership with all major aspects of the state, rather than as a response to patient activism in the aftermath of AIDS. Furthermore, even in cases when some patients successfully demand accelerated marketing approval of cancer drugs, such approval by regulators, while in manufacturers' interests, may not be in the interests of patients' health because the political culture of the regulatory agency is reluctant to uphold its own techno-regulatory standards of public-health protection when that would challenge the agenda-setting influence of manufacturers, including industry collaborations with patients and the medical profession.

Framing disease: the example of female hypoactive sexual desire disorder

Disease classification is an important part in the process of medicalisation and one important tool by which medical authority is exerted. The demand for, or proposal of a diagnosis may be the first step in casting life's experiences as medical in nature. Aronowitz has written about how diagnoses result from social framing mechanisms (2008) and consensus (2001), while Brown (1995) has demonstrated a complex range of interactions between lay and professionals, institutions and industries which underpin disease discovery. In any case, there are numerous social factors which shape the diagnosis, and in turn, provide a mechanism by which medicalisation can be enacted. Focussing on diagnostic classification provides an important perspective on the human condition and its relationship to medicine. To illustrate how layers of social meaning may be concealed in a diagnosis, this paper uses as heuristic the relatively obscure diagnosis of Female Hyposexual Desire Disorder which is currently surfacing in medical and marketing literature as a frequent disorder worthy of concern. I describe how this diagnosis embodies long-standing fascination with female libido, a contemporary focus on female hypersexuality, and commercial interest of the pharmaceutical industry and its medical allies to reify low sexual urge as a pathological disorder in women.