AstraZeneca: external speaker’s “sexygliptin” joke breached Clause 9.1; attendee allegations not proven (AUTH/2887/11/16)

📊

Key facts

⌄

Case number	AUTH/2887/11/16
Complainant	Anonymous health professional (described themself as a GP)
Company	AstraZeneca
Meetings	Two promotional meetings (November 2015 and November 2016)
Product(s)	Forxiga (dapagliflozin); speaker reference to Onglyza (saxagliptin)
Main issues	Alleged inappropriate attendee/subsistence (retired GP father); appropriateness of practice manager/healthcare assistant attendance; speaker’s “sexygliptin” remark
Complaint received	14 November 2016
Case completed	10 February 2017
Applicable Code year	2016
Breach findings	Clause 9.1 (breach); Clauses 11.1, 15.2, 22.1, 2 (no breach)
Sanctions	Undertaking received; additional sanctions not stated
Appeal	No appeal

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

📋

⌄

An anonymous, contactable complainant (described themself as a GP) complained about two AstraZeneca promotional meetings (November 2015 and November 2016) for Forxiga (dapagliflozin).
The complainant alleged the secondary care representative’s retired GP father (not practising and not GMC registered) attended both meetings and consumed a meal (subsistence).
The complainant alleged the secondary care representative’s mother (practice manager and healthcare assistant) discussed prescribing and recommended medicines, and asked a GP to sign a prescription.
The complainant also alleged no manager was present at either meeting.
The complainant said the speaker referred to Onglyza (saxagliptin) as “sexygliptin” to help customers remember it.
AstraZeneca investigated via CRM/attendee lists and interviews; the father was not on attendee lists and was said not to have attended as a delegate or consumed subsistence. For the 2016 meeting, evidence suggested he arrived early to collect his wife and spoke briefly with former colleagues.
The external speaker stated the “sexygliptin” reference was intended as humour; AstraZeneca noted the speaker contract and guidelines required humour not to cause offence or be unbefitting the audience.

⚖️

⌄

No breach for alleged inappropriate attendance/subsistence by the retired GP father (Panel found no evidence he attended as a delegate or received subsistence).
No breach for the mother’s attendance as a delegate (Panel found no evidence it was inappropriate; her role could make her a health professional and/or relevant decision maker depending on duties).
Breach of Clause 9.1: high standards were not maintained due to the speaker’s “sexygliptin” remark (humour unbefitting the professional audience).
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