← Back to Cases
PMCPA Case

Astellas Mycamine advisory boards ruled disguised promotion and inducement (AUTH/2290/12/09)

📅 8 March 2026 | 🖉 Dr Anzal Qurbain
đź“Š

Key facts

⌄
Case numberAUTH/2290/12/09
PartiesAnonymous Clinician v Astellas Pharma
MedicineMycamine (micafungin)
Activity typeAdvisory boards (three pairs of regional meetings)
LocationsLondon, Birmingham, Edinburgh
Timing of meetingsJune/July 2009
Fee/honorariumÂŁ1,000 total (ÂŁ500 per meeting)
Complaint received21 December 2009
Case completed16 March 2010
Applicable Code year2008
Breach clausesClause 2, Clause 9.1, Clause 12.1, Clause 18.1 and Clause 20
AppealNo appeal
SanctionsUndertaking received; Additional sanctions: Advertisement

Download the full case report (PDF)

Reviewed by Dr Anzal Qurbain (FFPM) — ABPI Final Signatory

🤖

Got a question about this case?

Ask one of our 13 specialist ABPI advisors — instant answers, 24/7.

Ask AskAnzal AI
đź“‹

What happened

⌄
  • An anonymous hospital clinician complained about a series of Mycamine (micafungin) advisory boards held in June/July 2009, saying the meeting felt more like promotion than advice-gathering.
  • After the meeting, an Astellas employee visited the complainant and the complainant saw a document listing named attendees and analysing their views on Mycamine, including who should be “promoted to” and whose opinion had shifted regarding prescribing.
  • The employee refused to provide a copy of the document and asked the complainant not to escalate the issue.
  • Astellas ran three pairs of regional meetings (London, Birmingham, Edinburgh), planned for ~12 advisors per region to attend both meetings; each meeting ran 8.45am–4.30pm and agendas appeared presentation-heavy.
  • Advisors were selected largely via recommendations from key account managers (KAMs). Internal guidance to KAMs referred to potential advisors as “Mycamine advocates” and included criteria such as belief in Mycamine and desire to become a brand advocate.
  • Participants were paid ÂŁ1,000 total (ÂŁ500 per meeting) and signed consultancy agreements allowing recordings/transcripts to be used for internal business purposes.
  • Post-meeting, detailed individual-level feedback (including a ranking from 0–10 and a slide stating “Raise awareness and create motivation to support/prescribe Mycamine” and “93% positive shift of opinion towards Mycamine”) was shared internally and, in part, with the field force.
  • The Panel was concerned about the role of MSLs and KAMs in pre-meeting dinners and follow-up, and that individual views were used to enable relationship-building and field activity.
⚖️

Outcome

⌄
  • Breach found: the overall arrangements for the advisory boards were ruled disguised promotion.
  • Breach found: payment of a fee to attend what was effectively a promotional event was ruled an inducement.
  • Breach found: the consultancy arrangements were not considered genuine given discrepancies between internal and external documentation and the involvement of KAMs/MSLs.
  • Breach found: failure to maintain a high standard.
  • Breach found: conduct brought discredit upon and reduced confidence in the industry (Clause 2 censure).
  • No appeal.
🔒

Unlock the full case analysis

Members get the complete breakdown — Clauses, Sanction, Signatory Lens, Audit checklist, and 3 Key Questions.

Best value
ÂŁ249/year
Annual — save £99
or
ÂŁ29/mo
Monthly
Join Now — Instant Access
← All Cases Book a Free Compliance Call

📰 Weekly PMCPA Case Breakdown

One real case. One key lesson. Every week — free.

Subscribe Free