Novo Nordisk: LinkedIn-promoted “free” weight management course and funded Saxenda PGDs ruled disguised promotion and inducement (AUTH/3525/6/21)

📊

Key facts

⌄

Case	AUTH/3525/6/21
Company	Novo Nordisk
Issue	Sponsored weight management courses promoted via LinkedIn; funding of PGDs for Saxenda (liraglutide)
Channel	LinkedIn post by training provider + linked webpage; webinar and e-learning module
Medicine	Saxenda (liraglutide)
Key compliance themes	Disguised promotion; lack of upfront sponsorship disclosure; lack of certification; missing prescribing information; inducement via funded PGD; high standards
Scale (as described)	Funding for up to 13,000 HCPs over 2 years; max contract value £350,500; as of 1 July 2021: 4,399 completed training; 599 PGDs activated (13.6%)
PGD value (as described)	£79 if purchased directly by a health professional
Applicable Code	2019
Breach clauses	2, 4.1, 9.1, 9.10, 12.1, 18.1, 22.4
Sanctions	Undertaking received; Advertisement; Public reprimand; Audit of company’s procedures; Report to ABPI Board; Suspended from ABPI membership for 2 years
Complaint received	22 June 2021
Suspension effective	16 March 2023
Case completed	15 March 2025

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

📋

⌄

A UK health professional complained about a LinkedIn post by a clinical training provider advertising a FREE weight management webinar with “funding to get you started”.
The LinkedIn post linked to a webpage headed “Free Weight Management Course (WEBINAR + PGD)” stating Novo Nordisk sponsorship covered course fees and provision of a PGD (if required) for each attendee.
Novo Nordisk’s sponsorship included funding a Patient Group Direction (PGD) for Saxenda (liraglutide) for eligible attendees who completed the course.
The Panel and Appeal Board found the webinar/e-learning content was heavily weighted towards Saxenda (detailed modules on Saxenda; limited coverage of alternatives), including content about pricing/potential profit from private Saxenda services.
The LinkedIn post itself did not disclose Novo Nordisk sponsorship at the outset; readers had to click through to see any sponsorship statement.
The arrangements were found not to be arm’s length, including contract terms that Novo Nordisk would attend training meetings and be given delegates to follow up, and a slide inviting consent for Novo Nordisk to contact delegates after the course.
Novo Nordisk argued it was independent education, that it only checked medical/factual accuracy for Saxenda content, and that funding PGDs supported responsible use—not inducement.

⚖️

⌄

Breach findings were upheld at appeal for Clauses 2, 4.1, 9.1 (x2), 12.1, 18.1.
Additional breach findings: Clauses 9.10 and 22.4 (sponsorship not made clear at the outset).
The Appeal Board concluded the activity was a large-scale disguised Saxenda promotional campaign with potential patient safety implications due to unbalanced information.
The Appeal Board issued a public reprimand and reported Novo Nordisk to the ABPI Board.
The ABPI Board required an audit; following the audit, Novo Nordisk was suspended from ABPI membership for 2 years (effective 16 March 2023), with conditions including re-audits in late 2023 and 2024.
In March 2025, after the latest re-audit, the ABPI Board unanimously voted to allow Novo Nordisk to reengage as a full ABPI member with no additional monitoring required.

📖

⌄

Clause 2 – Bringing discredit upon, and reducing confidence in, the pharmaceutical industry
Clause 4.1 – Failing to include prescribing information
Clause 9.1 (x2) – Failing to maintain high standards and secondly for failing to certify promotional material
Clause 9.10 – Failing to indicate, at the outset, that the training and offer of PGDs was sponsored by Novo Nordisk
Clause 12.1 – Disguised promotion
Clause 18.1 – Offering a benefit to individual health professionals that did not meet the requirements of the Code and was considered an inducement to prescribe, supply, administer and/or recommend Saxenda
Clause 22.4 – Failing to disclose, at the outset, in all of the papers relating to the meetings that the training had been sponsored by Novo Nordisk

🔒

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