AstraZeneca & Bristol-Myers Squibb: Onglyza advert in Health Service Journal (audience targeting)

📊

Key facts

⌄

Case numbers	AUTH/2426/8/11; AUTH/2427/8/11; AUTH/2428/8/11; AUTH/2429/8/11
Parties	Members of the public v AstraZeneca UK Limited and Bristol-Myers Squibb Pharmaceuticals Limited
Medicine	Onglyza (saxagliptin)
Material	Full-page advertorial advertisement (ref 422UK11PM170/CZ006148-ONGL)
Publication / placement	Health Service Journal (HSJ), 4 August 2011
Complaint received	8 August 2011 (AUTH/2426/8/11 & AUTH/2427/8/11); 9 August 2011 (AUTH/2428/8/11 & AUTH/2429/8/11)
Applicable Code year	2011
Clauses considered	Clause 11.1; Clause 22.1
Panel decision	No breach Clause 22.1; breach Clause 11.1 (not tailored to main HSJ audience)
Appeal outcome	Appeal by respondents successful; no breach of Clause 11.1
Final outcome	No breach of the Code
Case completed	16 November 2011

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

📋

⌄

Two complaints from members of the public challenged a full-page Onglyza (saxagliptin) advertorial placed in the Health Service Journal (HSJ) (published 4 August 2011).
Concerns were that HSJ is read by NHS managers (and could be read by the public) and that the advert’s technical/clinical content should have been limited to medical/clinical publications.
The PMCPA asked the companies to consider Clauses 11.1 and 22.1.
The companies said HSJ was subscription-only, not promoted to the public, and read by health professionals and appropriate administrative staff; the advert was payer-oriented and certified specifically for HSJ.
The Panel accepted HSJ was a specialist professional title (so not public advertising), but initially considered the advert was not tailored to HSJ’s main readership (mostly management/administrative) and therefore breached Clause 11.1.
AstraZeneca and Bristol-Myers Squibb appealed; the Appeal Board found the advert sufficiently tailored to a significant proportion of HSJ’s audience and overturned the Clause 11.1 breach.

⚖️

⌄

No breach of the Code (final outcome).
No breach of Clause 22.1 (Panel).
Panel initially ruled a breach of Clause 11.1, but this was overturned on appeal (Appeal Board ruled no breach of Clause 11.1).
Appeal by respondents was successful.

🔒

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