Novartis employees’ LinkedIn ‘likes’ and comment on Glivec/Gleevec ruled misleading and public promotion (AUTH/3579/11/21)

📊

Key facts

⌄

Case	AUTH/3579/11/21
Complainant	Anonymous, non-contactable UK health professional
Company	Novartis Pharmaceuticals UK Limited
Product	Glivec / Gleevec (imatinib mesylate)
Channel	LinkedIn (employee ‘likes’ and a comment)
Main content at issue	Patient advocate post with headline “Once Terminal, Now Controllable”; employee comment “Glivec is a lifesaver drug”
Audience risk	Employees’ networks included members of the public and health professionals
Employees’ connections	Employee 2 ~200; Employee 3 ~200 (as of 25 Nov 2021)
Complaint received	8 November 2021
Case completed	9 November 2022
Applicable Code year	2021
Appeal	No appeal
Breach clauses	5.1, 6.1, 6.2, 14.4, 26.1, 26.2
No breach clauses	2, 5.2, 5.5, 9.1, 9.3, 14.1, 14.2, 18.1
Sanctions	Undertaking received; additional sanctions not stated

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 UK health professional complained about LinkedIn activity relating to imatinib (US brand Gleevec; UK brand Glivec).
A US patient advocate posted about long-term survival after CML diagnosis, with the headline: “Once Terminal, Now Controllable”, and text describing enrolment in a clinical trial studying Gleevec.
An employee of another pharmaceutical company (ex-Novartis) shared the patient advocate’s post with additional positive commentary about imatinib and innovation.
Employee 2 (employed by Novartis at the time) liked and commented on the original post, stating: “Glivec is a lifesaver drug”.
Employee 3 (employed by Novartis at the time) liked the shared post (the Panel accepted Novartis’ submission that the like related to the shared post).
Employee 2 and Employee 3 each had around 200 LinkedIn connections; their networks included members of the public and health professionals.
Novartis instructed relevant individuals to unlike the posts and remove comments once the complaint was received, and confirmed this occurred.
The Panel made no rulings regarding the other company’s employee or a former Novartis employee (Employee 1) because those actions were outside scope for Novartis (Employee 1 had left Novartis when they liked the shared post).

⚖️

⌄

Breach found for misleading/unsubstantiated implications from “Once Terminal, Now Controllable” (as disseminated via employees’ interactions).
Breach found for Employee 2’s exaggerated promotional claim: “Glivec is a lifesaver drug”.
Breach found for promotion of a prescription only medicine to the public via LinkedIn dissemination caused by ‘likes’/comment.
Breach found for raising unfounded hopes (Employee 2 and Employee 3 activities).
Breach found for failure to maintain high standards.
No breach of Clause 2 (particular censure) in the circumstances.
No breach of Clauses 5.2, 5.5, 9.1, 9.3, 14.1, 14.2, 18.1.
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