UCB: Out-of-date Neupro prescribing information found on internal test webpage (no breach)

📅 2019 | 🖉 Dr Anzal Qurbain
📊

Key facts

Case numberAUTH/3353/5/20
CompanyUCB
ComplainantConcerned UK health professional (self-described)
ProductNeupro (rotigotine transdermal patch)
ChannelWebsite (mypatchandme) / specific URL to a test page
AllegationPrescribing information online was out of date and omitted rhabdomyolysis
Key evidence notedCertified HCP area (passcode) had Feb 2020 PI including rhabdomyolysis; test page PI dated Sept 2019; analytics showed 2 unique visitors and 3 visits to the test page
Panel decisionNo breach of Clauses 2, 4.1, 9.1
Complaint received23 May 2020
Case completed29 March 2021
Applicable Code year2019
AppealNo appeal

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.

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
📋

What happened

  • A UK health professional complained that online prescribing information for Neupro (rotigotine transdermal patch) was out of date and did not include rhabdomyolysis as a possible severe side-effect.
  • The complainant provided a URL and screenshot and said they accessed it without any special username.
  • UCB said the page was a test page created to check website functionality, intended for internal use only, and not part of the certified external site journey.
  • UCB said the certified health professional area (passcode-protected) contained up-to-date prescribing information (dated February 2020) which did include rhabdomyolysis (frequency not known).
  • UCB stated the test page could only be reached by typing the exact URL; it was not linked from the live site and the URL had not been communicated externally.
  • UCB’s analytics showed only two unique visitors and three visits to the page, occurring on 26 May 2020 and attributed to UCB’s investigation team.
  • UCB removed the page immediately after receiving the complaint and said it would revise internal processes/guidelines for managing digital assets.
⚖️

Outcome

  • No breach of the Code was ruled.
  • No breach of Clause 4.1.
  • No breach of Clause 9.1.
  • No breach of Clause 2.
🔒

Unlock the full case analysis

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

Best value
£249/year
Annual — save £99
or
£29/mo
Monthly
Join Now — Instant Access

⭐ Business Intelligence Access

See the full compliance picture for every pharma company

291 Company Intelligence Reports — breach patterns, appeal history, industry ranking, PDF export.

Request Access →
⭐ Flagship Programme

AQP Flagship Path — the complete UK ABPI signatory programme

12 modules. 12 weeks. Final Signatory readiness. The industry standard for ABPI Code signatories — £995 + VAT.

Enrol — AQP Path Learn more

📰 Weekly PMCPA Case Breakdown

One real case. One key lesson. Every week — free.

Subscribe Free
🎓 AQP Training