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

2008
CASE
Johnson

Pfizer v Johnson & Johnson: Nicorette slide implied an underpowered study could prove β€œno difference” vs varenicline

A Nicorette presentation slide claimed β€œno statistically significant difference” vs varenicline, but the study wasn’t powered for that comparison. A footnote didn’t…

2019
CASE
AUTH/3273/10/19 Gedeon Richter

Gedeon Richter website: missing generic names on HCP resource centre (AUTH/3273/10/19)

HCP complained Richter Resource Centre was disguised promotion and accessible to the public. Panel found no disguised promotion/public advertising, but ruled breaches…

2015
CASE
AUTH/2780/7/15 Astellas ⭐ Case of the Week

Astellas: misleading PMCPA submissions about advisory board delegate selection led to public reprimands, audits and ABPI suspension (AUTH/2780/7/15)

Anonymous employee alleged Astellas misled PMCPA about Milan advisory board delegate selection. Panel/Appeal Board found false/incomplete information and dismissive senior messaging. Result:…

2019
CASE
AUTH/3162/2/19 AstraZeneca

AUTH/3162/2/19: Complainant v AstraZeneca β€” Twitter re-tweet about Heart Failure Awareness Week (No breach)

AstraZeneca’s global Twitter account re-tweeted a US disease-awareness post linking to HFSA events. Complaint alleged multiple Code breaches, but the Panel found…

2018
CASE
AUTH/3108/10/18 Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma

AUTH/3108/10/18: Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma Europe – product webpages held to promote POMs to the public

Corporate product pages naming POMs and indications were accessible to the public without clear audience separation or public reference info. PMCPA ruled…

2019
CASE
AUTH/3217/6/19 Otsuka

Otsuka: Jinarc training portal held to be non-promotional (no breach) (AUTH/3217/6/19)

Health professional said Jinarc training site was promotional, lacked clear PI and implied MHRA endorsement. Panel found it was MHRA-mandated risk-minimisation training…

2011
CASE
AUTH/2388/2/11 GlaxoSmithKline Consumer

AUTH/2388/2/11: NiQuitin patch leavepieceβ€”pharmacokinetic comparisons held to mislead on clinical efficacy

GSK Consumer Healthcare’s NiQuitin 21mg Clear Patch leavepiece compared nicotine delivery vs rival patches. Panel found it could imply clinical superiority without…

2011
CASE
AUTH/2405/5/11 ALK-Abelló ⭐ Case of the Week

AUTH/2405/5/11: Meda v ALK-AbellΓ³ (Jext leavepiece) – No breach

Intercompany complaint about Jext leavepiece diagrams and the claim β€œdesigned to be easy to use”. Panel found the diagrams aligned with the…

2011
CASE
AUTH/2390/2/11

AUTH/2390/2/11: Anonymous representative v Alcon β€” Azarga pH demonstration (No breach)

Anonymous complaint alleged reps used litmus paper and eye drops to demonstrate pH and encouraged instillation into eyes. Panel found no evidence…

2011
CASE
AUTH/2423/7/11 Vifor Pharma

AUTH/2423/7/11: Pharmacosmos v Vifor Pharma – Ferinject leavepiece claims ruled misleading

Vifor’s Ferinject leavepiece used a strapline implying special merit and clinic-time comparison graphics based on altered SPC timings. PMCPA ruled two breaches…

2011
CASE
AUTH/2413/6/11 Leo Pharma

AUTH/2413/6/11: Leo – Xamiol film clip mistakenly included on Tysabri patient DVD (promotion to the public)

A Xamiol application video was inadvertently included on a Biogen Idec Tysabri patient DVD distributed to HCPs and patients. Leo was held…

2011
CASE
AUTH/2445/10/11 Boehringer Ingelheim

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

A GP alleged a pre-licence sponsored article used an unconfirmed linagliptin price to bypass advance notification rules. The Panel found the article…

2018
CASE
AUTH/3068/9/18 Sanofi ⭐ Case of the Week

AUTH/3068/9/18: Director v Sanofi β€” Clinical trial disclosure (outwith scope; no breach)

PMCPA case AUTH/3068/9/18 (Director v Sanofi) concerned clinical trial disclosure but was ruled outwith the scope of the ABPI Code (2016). No…

2018
CASE
AUTH/3083/9/18 Eisai

AUTH/3083/9/18: Director v Eisai β€” Clinical trial disclosure (outwith scope; no breach)

PMCPA case AUTH/3083/9/18 (Director v Eisai) concerned clinical trial disclosure. The matter was ruled outwith the scope of the ABPI Code (2016).…

2012
CASE
AUTH/2526/8/12 Sanofi

Sanofi Pasteur MSD: Shingles β€˜advertorial’ and linked websites ruled to promote Zostavax to the public (AUTH/2526/8/12)

A shingles awareness advert in a lifestyle magazine, plus links/QR code to a company site and a patient organisation site, was ruled…

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