Ferring: “NPSA recommends” claim in Glypressin tender letter ruled misleading (AUTH/2302/3/10)

📊

Key facts

⌄

Case number	AUTH/2302/3/10
Complainant	Senior hospital pharmacist
Company	Ferring Pharmaceuticals Ltd
Product	Glypressin Solution for Injection (terlipressin acetate)
Material	“Dear Pharmacist” letter (ref GL/317/02/10) about national tender award via NHS PASA
Key claim at issue	“Ready to use for injection (The National Patient Safety Agency recommends that only licensed ready-to-administer or ready-to-use injectable medicines are supplied)”
Source cited	NPSA Patient Safety Alert 20 (2007) “Promoting safer use of injectable medicines”
PMCPA finding	Misleading; context not fully reflected; not capable of substantiation as presented
Breach clauses	Clause 7.2 and Clause 7.4
Complaint received	09 March 2010
Case completed	15 April 2010
Applicable Code year	2008
Appeal	No appeal
Sanctions	Undertaking received; Additional sanctions: Not stated

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

🎬 Expert Video Walkthrough

🎬

Video walkthrough — coming for members

Subscribe now and get expert video analysis for every case as we publish them.

Subscribe — from £299/yr

📋

⌄

A senior hospital pharmacist complained about a “Dear Pharmacist” letter (ref GL/317/02/10) from Ferring about Glypressin Solution for Injection (terlipressin acetate), mailed to NHS hospital pharmacists in February 2010, linked to a national tender award in England via NHS PASA.
The letter listed advantages of the new Glypressin Solution, including: “Ready to use for injection (The National Patient Safety Agency recommends that only licensed ready-to-administer or ready-to-use injectable medicines are supplied)”.
The complainant alleged Ferring was scaremongering and misquoting an NPSA patient safety alert to drive NHS sales, arguing the NPSA wording was “preferable”, not a “recommendation”.
Ferring cited NPSA Patient Safety Alert 20 (2007) “Promoting safer use of injectable medicines”, which stated: “It is preferable that only licensed ready-to-administer or ready-to-use injectable medicines are procured and supplied…”.
The Panel found the letter did not sufficiently reflect the NPSA’s context (one sentence taken from a longer section about “purchasing for safety” policies) and that “preference” was presented as a “recommendation”.

⚖️

⌄

The letter was ruled misleading and not capable of substantiation in the way the NPSA advice was presented.
Breaches were ruled under Clauses 7.2 and 7.4 of the Code.
No appeal.

🔒

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

Best value

£249/year

Annual — save £99

£29/mo

Monthly

Join Now — Instant Access