MAM
Nescafe Sunrise moves creative account to Publicis
MUMBAI: As part of its global alignment, Nestle has handed over the creative duties for its coffee brand Nescafe Sunrise to Publicis Groupe.
The account was earlier held by McCann Worldwide.
Publicis‘ Delhi office will be handling the account.
Publicis won the global mandate in September 2011, though the development did not affect McCann and Nescafe Sunrise in India at that time. McCann, though, will continue to partner Nestle for its Nescafe brand.
Nestle operates in the beverage category though three main brands – Nescafe Classic, Nescafe Sunrise and Nestea. While Lowe Lintas handles the company‘s confectionary brand like Polo and Eclairs, JWT is responsible for its chocolate business.
Publicis will also continue to handle the foods and dairy business along with Nestea.
Brands
Bayer sues Johnson & Johnson over prostate cancer drug advertisements
Legal dispute begins as Bayer claims rival marketing is based on flawed data
NEW YORK: Bayer has filed a federal lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson (J&J) in New York, alleging that the American pharmaceutical company has used false and misleading advertisements to promote its prostate cancer treatment, Erleada. The dispute centres on claims that Erleada is significantly more effective than Bayer’s competing drug, Nubeqa.
The legal action follows a J&J marketing campaign that cited a 51 per cent reduction in the risk of death for patients using Erleada compared to those on Nubeqa. Bayer contends that these figures are based on a study with severe methodological errors rather than a controlled clinical trial.
Bayer’s legal team argues that J&J’s real-world analysis is fundamentally flawed. According to the complaint, J&J claimed to have 24 months of patient data supporting its conclusions, even though many patients included in the study had reportedly been on the medication for only a few months, raising concerns about the reliability of long-term survival comparisons.
The lawsuit also highlights what Bayer describes as a critical approval gap. For most of the period analysed in J&J’s study, Nubeqa had not yet been approved for the specific indication being evaluated, which Bayer argues makes a direct clinical comparison inappropriate and potentially misleading.
Additionally, Bayer contends that the study suffered from significant sample imbalance. The analysis reportedly included five times as many Erleada patients as Nubeqa patients, a disparity that Bayer says introduced statistical bias and undermined the validity of the findings.
Bayer is pursuing the case under the Lanham Act, the U.S. law governing false advertising and unfair competition. The company is seeking an immediate halt to J&J’s current marketing campaign and is asking the court to require corrective statements to physicians to address what it characterises as inaccurate claims.
Furthermore, Bayer is seeking monetary damages, arguing that the alleged misleading advertisements have resulted in lost revenue and reputational harm to Nubeqa.
Johnson & Johnson has responded by stating that it stands by the integrity of its data and the rigour of its analysis. The case will now proceed through the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
