AUTH/2974/9/17: Anonymous clinician v ViiV Healthcare (IAS webinar) – No breach | PMCPA Case

📊

Key facts

⌄

Case number	AUTH/2974/9/17
Complainant	Anonymous, non-contactable clinician (appeared to be a pharmacist)
Company	ViiV Healthcare
Product	Tivicay (dolutegravir)
Activity	IAS webinar (live online meeting) filmed in Paris on 27 July 2017
Main allegations	Promotion to the public due to patient on stage (Clause 26.1); PI not easily accessible (Clause 4.1); high standards/discredit (Clauses 9.1 and 2)
Panel decision	No breach of Clauses 26.1, 4.1, 9.1 and 2
Complaint received	7 September 2017
Case completed	14 November 2017
Applicable Code year	2016
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, non-contactable clinician (appeared to be a pharmacist) complained about a ViiV Healthcare IAS webinar filmed live in Paris (27 July 2017).
The webinar was described as mostly about dolutegravir (Tivicay) for HIV.
The complainant alleged an HIV patient was on stage with ViiV doctors while prescription products were discussed, appearing to give a “silent blessing” for dolutegravir (alleged promotion to the public).
The complainant also alleged prescribing information (PI) for dolutegravir was not easily available via a single click and that repeated clicking frustrated attendees.
ViiV said the individual on stage was contracted as an expert/author presenting patient survey research (not endorsing any product) and that attendees were verified health professionals; the webinar was not available after the event.
ViiV said PI was: (1) shown on slides for 3 minutes 53 seconds during Q&A, (2) included in email/print invitations, and (3) available on-demand during the webinar via four clicks.

⚖️

⌄

No breach of the Code was found.
No breach of Clause 26.1 (promotion to the public): the panelist was contracted as an expert presenting survey research and did not mention Tivicay or any other product in the transcript; in the circumstances this did not amount to promotion of a prescription-only medicine to the public.
No breach of Clause 4.1 (prescribing information): although single-click access would have been preferable, PI was shown on screen for nearly four minutes and was included in invitations; PI was considered supplied.
No breach of Clauses 9.1 and 2: given the above, the panel did not consider ViiV failed to maintain high standards or brought discredit/reduced confidence in the industry.
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