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

2009
CASE
AUTH/2289/12/09 Alcon Laboratories ⭐ Case of the Week

AUTH/2289/12/09: Merck Sharp & Dohme v Alcon β€” Azarga β€œcomfort” leavepiece and over-emphasis claims

Alcon’s Azarga leavepiece repeatedly used β€œcomfort/comfortable”. Appeal Board allowed the comparative β€œSignificantly more comfortable than Cosopt” claim (with data), but upheld breaches…

2010
CASE
AUTH/2315/4/10 Merck Serono

Anonymous Employee v Merck Serono (AUTH/2315/4/10): Target contact rates – no breach

Anonymous key account manager alleged verbal contact-rate targets forced Code breaches. Panel found no evidence targets required excessive calls; company data suggested…

2010
CASE
AUTH/2294/1/10 AstraZeneca

AstraZeneca: Seroquel ad claim of β€œfavourable weight profile” ruled misleading (AUTH/2294/1/10, AUTH/2296/1/10, AUTH/2297/1/10)

Three complaints about a 2004 Seroquel journal ad. PMCPA ruled the β€œonly atypical… favourable weight profile across the full dose range” claim…

2010
CASE
AUTH/2330/7/10 GrΓΌnenthal

GrΓΌnenthal: Versatis poster deemed promotional and off‑label (AUTH/2330/7/10)

A British Pain Society poster/handout about Versatis included an β€œoff-label” cost-saving conclusion. PMCPA ruled the poster was promotional, breached off-label and high-standards…

2010
CASE
AUTH/2374/12/10 Pfizer

Anonymous v Pfizer: Regional account directors not required to pass ABPI Medical Representatives Examination (AUTH/2374/12/10)

PMCPA ruled Pfizer in breach after two regional account directors had been in post for 2 years without passing the ABPI Medical…

2017
CASE
AUTH/2979/9/17 PharmaMar ⭐ Case of the Week

AUTH/2979/9/17: Anonymous non-contactable complainant v PharmaMar

PMCPA case summary: Anonymous non-contactable complainant vs PharmaMar (AUTH/2979/9/17). Case details, clauses, outcome and sanctions were not stated in the provided case…

2019
CASE
AUTH/3170/3/19 Novartis Pharmaceuticals UK

AUTH/3170/3/19: Health professional v Novartis β€” Entresto speaker meeting presentation (no breach)

A GP complained a Novartis-sponsored Entresto presentation was unbalanced and omitted side effects. The PMCPA Panel found the overall meeting included safety/SPC…

2018
CASE
AUTH/3109/10/18 AstraZeneca

AUTH/3109/10/18: AstraZeneca website – Forxiga, Onglyza and Symbicort claims (misleading comparisons and undue emphasis)

AstraZeneca’s HCP website content for Onglyza and Symbicort COPD was ruled misleading due to layout/undue emphasis on relative effects. Forxiga and Symbicort…

2019
CASE
AUTH/3217/6/19 Otsuka

AUTH/3217/6/19: Health professional v Otsuka (Jinarc training website) – No breach

A health professional alleged Otsuka’s Jinarc training portal was promotional, lacked compliant prescribing info and improperly referenced the MHRA. The Panel found…

2010
CASE
AUTH/2346/8/10 Allergan

AUTH/2346/8/10: Merz/Director v Allergan β€” presentation found to breach an undertaking (botulinum toxin potency implication)

Allergan’s tender-related presentation reused Hunt & Clarke animal assay data in a way that implied Botox was more potent than Xeomin, contrary…

2010
CASE
AUTH/2367/10/10 Takeda ⭐ Case of the Week

Takeda misleadingly implied generic losartan was a black triangle medicine in ARB heart failure ad (AUTH/2367/10/10)

A two-page Amias ad compared ARBs in heart failure and marked losartan as a black triangle drug. PMCPA held this implied all…

2011
CASE
AUTH/2392/2/11 Sanofi

AUTH/2392/2/11: Anonymous v Sanofi-Aventis β€” patients attended Multaq promotional meeting

Patients attended and spoke at a Sanofi-Aventis promotional meeting where Multaq was promoted, leading to a breach for advertising a POM to…

2011
CASE
AUTH/2437/9/11 Boehringer Ingelheim

Doctor v Boehringer Ingelheim: Pradaxa promotional email sent without unsubscribe link (AUTH/2437/9/11)

A doctor complained a Pradaxa promotional email was sent to his NHS account and had no unsubscribe link. Panel found consent likely…

2018
CASE
AUTH/3078/9/18 Amgen

AUTH/3078/9/18: Director v Amgen (Clinical trial disclosure) – No breach

BMJ analysis suggested Amgen had unreported EUCTR trial results. Panel found two trials were out of UK Code scope (no UK nexus)…

2011
CASE
AUTH/2445/10/11 Boehringer Ingelheim

AUTH/2445/10/11: GP v Boehringer Ingelheim β€” Sponsored linagliptin (Trajenta) article and β€œanticipated” price (No breach)

A GP alleged a sponsored pre-licence article improperly shared an unconfirmed linagliptin price as β€œadvance notification”. Panel held the article was not…

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