AUTH/3724/1/23: Complainant v GSK (Shingrix) — TV shingles awareness advert and website (No breach) | PMCPA Case

📊

Key facts

⌄

Case number	AUTH/3724/1/23
Company	GlaxoSmithKline (GSK)
Complainant	A complainant who described themself as a UK physician
Material	30-second TV advert about shingles (broadcast 7 January 2023) and linked GSK shingles disease-awareness website
Allegation	Indirect/disguised promotion of Shingrix to the public via disease awareness advertising
Applicable Code	2021
Clauses considered	5.1, 26.1, 26.2
Decision	No breach of Clauses 5.1, 26.1, 26.2
Rationale (high level)	Panel considered the advert and website provided a balanced overview of shingles and did not promote a specific POM; another shingles vaccine (Zostavax) existed at the time; no product was named or linked.
Complaint received	10 January 2023
Case completed	15 November 2023
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

📋

⌄

A UK physician complained about a 30-second GSK TV advert on shingles broadcast on Sky TV on 7 January 2023.
The advert included a URL to a GSK shingles disease-awareness website and encouraged viewers to ask a healthcare professional about shingles and visit the site to learn more.
The complainant alleged the campaign was disguised promotion of GSK’s shingles vaccine Shingrix (licensed 2018), arguing it would lead the public to ask their GP about Shingrix.
The complainant referenced that another shingles vaccine existed (MSD’s Zostavax, licensed 2006) and noted NHS wording that most people receive Zostavax, with Shingrix recommended if Zostavax is not suitable.
GSK said the advert and website were non-promotional disease education, did not name Shingrix (or any medicine), and were designed to avoid links to specific products (including no third-party links from the website).

⚖️

⌄

📖

⌄

Clause 5.1 Requirement to maintain high standards at all times
Clause 26.1 Requirement not to advertise prescription only medicines to the public
Clause 26.2 Requirement that information about prescription only medicines which is made available to the public must be factual, balanced, must not raise unfounded hopes of successful treatment or encourage the public to ask their health professional to prescribe a specific prescription only medicine

🔒

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