The PMCPA has dug into the industry’s LinkedIn activities once again. AstraZeneca received the harshest censure in the latest set of cases, taking a telling-off over one of its own posts, while Pfizer escaped with a slap on the wrist after its employees got too liberal with their LinkedIn likes.
A who’s who of leading drugmakers have run afoul of the restrictions on social media in recent months, with the latest PMCPA reviews moving the number of completed LinkedIn cases since the start of last year above 25. The PMCPA, pharma’s marketing self-regulatory body in the U.K., has found drugmakers have broken the medicine promotion rules, often because their employees liked posts by third parties.
The latest AstraZeneca case is a little different. The PMCPA began looking into the topic after receiving a screenshot of an AstraZeneca LinkedIn post from an anonymous complainant. The post included a brand name, “Calquence,” and the drug’s indication “CLL,” an abbreviation of chronic lymphocytic leukemia.
In its defense, AstraZeneca said the certified version of the post contained no reference to the drug or its indication. However, the PMCPA case preparation manager took a screenshot of a post that did contain the references and the panel based its ruling on that image. Because the post contained the brand name and indication, the PMCPA panel deemed it promotional and ruled AstraZeneca had breached the code.
The case hinged on that decision. Once the post was deemed promotional, the absence of various pieces of mandatory information such the prescribing information and an adverse events reporting statement led the panel to rule AstraZeneca had breached multiple other clauses. The absence of the important safety details informed the panel’s conclusion that AstraZeneca had failed to maintain high standards.
AstraZeneca was spared the shame of being found to have brought discredit on the industry. The panel assessed whether the post breached that clause, but mitigating factors such as the lack of promotional information other than the brand and indication saved AstraZeneca.
The case against Pfizer is more typical of the ways companies have broken the rules on social media use in recent months. The PMCPA received a complaint that four Pfizer employees based in the U.K. had liked a LinkedIn post by an independent cancer research charity. The post mentioned talazoparib, the active ingredient in Pfizer’s cancer drug Talzenna.
The panel concluded the employees’ engagement with the post “would have proactively disseminated it to their LinkedIn connections in the U.K., which included members of the public.” That brought the post within the scope of the code and led the panel to rule Pfizer broke the rule against advertising drugs to the public.
Pfizer accepted it had breached that part of the code. The drugmaker also said “that the errors that have been identified do not maintain the high standards expected of our industry,” leading it to accept it had breached another clause, 5.1. However, the PMCPA found Pfizer had maintained high standards.
“Recognizing the clarity of Pfizer’s compliance program on this topic, regular messaging around social media, the content of the post at issue and the need for proportionate regulation, the panel considered that its concerns were addressed in the ruling of a breach of Clause 26.1 above and, therefore, ruled no breach of Clause 5.1,” the PMCPA said.