PMCPA Case
| Case number | AUTH/2763/5/15 |
| Parties | PMCPA Director v AstraZeneca |
| Case type / route | Paragraph 5.1 (Director-initiated) |
| Issue | Clinical trial disclosure (timeliness/scope) for Caprelsa (vandetanib) and Zinforo (ceftaroline fosamil) |
| Source prompting complaint | ABPI-funded CMRO publication (online 5 May 2015) and its supplemental disclosure tables |
| Complaint received / proceedings commenced | 14 May 2015 |
| Case completed | 2 July 2015 |
| Applicable Code year (case listing) | 2008 |
| Clauses considered | Clause 2; Clause 9.1; Clause 21.3 |
| Caprelsa data in paper | 41 evaluable; 39 disclosed within timeframe (95%); two Phase II trials flagged as undisclosed within timeframe |
| Caprelsa Panel reasoning | Trials completed Nov 2003 and Aug 2006; 2008 Code/Joint Position 2005 applied; one pre-dated Joint Position 2005 and was published May 2005; the other was exploratory, terminated early, not medically significant and did not impact labelling |
| Zinforo data in paper | 10 evaluable; 7 disclosed within timeframe (70%); 9 disclosed by 31 July 2014 (90%); one remained undisclosed at 31 July 2014 |
| Zinforo Panel reasoning | Two older studies completed July 2008/Feb 2009 were before AstraZeneca sublicence (responsibility of another company; separate case AUTH/2772/6/15). Remaining study NCT01298843 (completed Feb 2013) was sponsored/designed/conducted by Forest in the US with no UK involvement; AstraZeneca not responsible under UK Code; out of scope |
| Appeal | No appeal |
| Final decision | No breach of the Code |
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.
⭐ Business Intelligence Access
See the full compliance picture for every pharma company
291 Company Intelligence Reports — breach patterns, appeal history, industry ranking, PDF export.
One real case. One key lesson. Every week — free.