PMCPA Case Analysis

Over 2,000 real rulings β€” analysed for what they mean to your team. Published every day.

All Cases PMCPA Case of the Week PMCPA Cases

Showing 1914 cases

2012
CASE
AUTH/2488/3/12 Meda Pharmaceuticals

Meda: uninvited β€˜Patient Safety’ email about EpiPen ruled disguised promotion (AUTH/2488/3/12)

A pharmacist complained about an uninvited Meda email titled as β€œPatient Safety” but promoting EpiPen. PMCPA found disguised promotion and use of…

2008
CASE
Astellas Pharma ⭐ Case of the Week

Astellas breached Clause 7.2 after Qutenza β€˜consensus statement’ insert implied independent/NICE-backed positioning

A Qutenza journal insert styled as a β€˜consensus statement’ and β€˜adapted from NICE’ was ruled misleading: funding/organisation by Astellas wasn’t clear upfront…

2012
CASE
AUTH/2533/10/12 Bayer

Anonymous v Bayer: Incentive scheme materials implied call targets that could breach the ABPI limit on unsolicited representative calls (AUTH/2533/10/12)

Bayer incentive scheme slides and emails pushed frequency targets (eg 50% of targets seen 3 times) without clearly stating ABPI limits. Panel…

2013
CASE
AUTH/2578/2/13 Novartis Pharmaceuticals UK

Journalist v Novartis: Daily Mail article alleged to promote Xolair via third-party quotes and pack shot (AUTH/2578/2/13)

A journalist alleged a Daily Mail Online story was covert promotion of Xolair. PMCPA assessed Novartis’ earlier press release (not the article)…

2012
CASE
AUTH/2544/11/12 Napp Pharmaceuticals

AUTH/2544/11/12: GP v Napp β€” BuTrans promotional emails to NHS address (no breach)

A GP complained that BuTrans ads were emailed twice to her NHS account. The Panel found evidence she had opted in via…

2013
CASE
AUTH/2594/4/13 Lundbeck

AUTH/2594/4/13: General practitioner v Lundbeck (Cipralex email via database agency) – No breach

A GP queried whether a Cipralex promotional email sent via a third-party database was unsolicited/spam. Panel found the recipient had previously opted…

2013
CASE
AUTH/2572/1/13 AstraZeneca ⭐ Case of the Week

AUTH/2572/1/13: Ex-employee v AstraZeneca – Seroquel investor presentations and weight-gain claims (No breach)

Ex-employee alleged archived investor presentations made false/imbalanced claims about Seroquel and weight gain. Panel and Appeal Board ruled no breach of Clause…

2013
CASE
AUTH/2619/7/13 Sanofi

Sanofi breached an undertaking by leaving Lyxumia β€œcost-effective/value” press release live (AUTH/2619/7/13)

Sanofi was ruled in breach for failing to comply with an earlier PMCPA undertaking after a Lyxumia press release remained on its…

2013
CASE
AUTH/2649/10/13 GlaxoSmithKline

GSK joint working project: materials certified 7–8 months after project start (AUTH/2649/10/13)

GSK voluntarily admitted a COPD NHS joint working project started and used materials before Code certification. PMCPA ruled breaches of Clauses 14.3,…

2013
CASE
AUTH/2653/11/13 Sanofi

AUTH/2653/11/13: Novo Nordisk v Sanofi β€” Lyxumia slides ruled misleading due to insufficient context from head-to-head study (Clause 7.2)

Sanofi used selective graphs from a 28‑day pharmacodynamic study to compare Lyxumia vs Victoza. The Panel said it wasn’t clear results were…

2015
CASE
Amgen

Sanofi v Amgen: Repatha ESC leavepiece headline β€˜75% additional LDL‑C reduction vs placebo’ ruled misleading

A Repatha leavepiece used a prominent β€˜75% additional LDL‑C reduction vs placebo’ headline from a small study cohort. The Panel ruled the…

2018
CASE
AUTH/3012/1/18 Pierre Fabre ⭐ Case of the Week

Pierre Fabre voluntary admission: uncertified sales briefing materials and pipeline promotion (AUTH/3012/1/18)

Pierre Fabre admitted multiple ABPI Code breaches after using and emailing uncertified cycle-meeting materials for Toviaz, including misleading comparative content and a…

2015
CASE
AUTH/2777/7/15 Sanofi

AUTH/2777/7/15: Anonymous (non-contactable) v Sanofi β€” business cards with brand name in job title (No breach)

Sanofi KAM business cards said β€œClexane Key Account Manager” without prescribing information. Panel found the card was not promotional on the evidence…

2015
CASE
AUTH/2746/1/15 AstraZeneca

AstraZeneca tweet on early breast cancer progression: complaint about substantiation (AUTH/2746/1/15)

A director of research challenged an AstraZeneca tweet claiming ~30% of women with early breast cancer develop advanced/metastatic disease. The PMCPA Panel…

2013
CASE
AUTH/2618/7/13 Chiesi

AstraZeneca v Chiesi: β€œfor an extra fine day” headline ruled misleading; certification failures led to public reprimand and audits (AUTH/2618/7/13)

A Fostair leavepiece headline (β€œNew licence… for an extra fine day”) was ruled ambiguous, misleading and unsubstantiated (Clauses 7.2, 7.4). Separate concerns…

Ask questions about any PMCPA case

Anzal, our PMCPA rulings expert, has knowledge of over 2,000 published cases β€” ask about precedents, clauses, and how they apply to your situation.

⭐ 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 β€” free.

Subscribe Free
🎓 AQP Training