GSK cleared of unethical practices by PMCPA
pharmafile | October 22, 2010 | News story | Medical Communications | ABPI, ABPI Code of Practice, Avamys, GSK, GlaxoSmithKline, PMCPA, Rupafin, Seretide
GlaxoSmithKline has been found guilty of two transgressions of the ABPI Code of Practice in a case centring on the manufacturer’s promotional practices.
But the pharma company was cleared by Code regulator the PMCPA on two other charges, one of them a serious claim about unethical practices among its sales teams.
An “anonymous medical contractor providing compliance services to pharmaceutical companies” said GSK made claims that were in breach of the Code about its respiratory and allergy therapy products.
These included regular references to the regulatory authorities – which clause 9.5 says is not allowed unless specifically required – and use of the word ‘new’ in promotional material for more than a year, which falls foul of clause 7.11.
A leavepiece for GSK’s asthma and COPD treatment Seretide included the claim: “To aid compliance with the concomitant use of ICS [inhaled corticosteroid] and LABA [long-acting beta agonist], a combination inhaler should be used when appropriate (MHRA Drug Safety update).”
And the promotion of allergic rhinitis brand Avamys started on 2 February 2009 – but material describing it as ‘new’ had not been recalled until 4 February 2010.
However, GSK was cleared by the panel on two other counts, the first relating to an absence of prescribing information for the products promoted on its health professional website.
The complainant did not provide any examples of where this was the case, and material given to the PMCPA panel by GSK showed that such information was available as a link on the website pages.
The final complaint was that GSK trained medical representatives poorly while setting “unrealistic” targets for its antihistamine Rupafin – and that this led to reps being manipulated into “target-driven, unethical practices”.
Again, no information to support the claims was given, and in fact the panel found “detailed” training was provided for reps promoting the brand. GSK argued that its targets were “ambitious but achievable”.
Overall GSK was also found not guilty of failing to maintain a high standard. The company has not appealed the decision.
Adam Hill
Related Content
GSK’s Jemperli accepted for FDA review for endometrial cancer treatment
GSK has announced that the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has accepted its supplemental …
GSK shares results from phase 3 trial for gonorrhoea treatment
GSK has announced positive results from its phase 3 EAGLE-1 trial for gepotidacin, a potential …
GSK’s meningococcal vaccine candidate accepted for FDA review
GSK has announced that the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has accepted for review …
