Skip to main content
Loading...

Understanding the EMA and ABPI:Comparison, overlap, and best practices for promotional compliance

Blog

In the pharmaceutical industry, successful market access and product promotion require careful navigation of regulatory and ethical frameworks. Two key organisations involved in these processes are the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry (ABPI). Though their roles are distinct, both play a critical part in shaping how medicines are brought to market and promoted to healthcare professionals.

This article outlines how the EMA and ABPI compare, where they overlap, how they differ, and what best practices should guide pharmaceutical companies when reviewing promotional material under their respective systems.
What is the EMA?

The European Medicines Agency is a decentralised body of the European Union that is responsible for evaluating and supervising medicines for human and veterinary use across EU member states and European Economic Area (EEA) countries.

Key functions:
  • Centralised marketing authorisations for the EU/EEA (excluding the UK post-Brexit)
  • Scientific advice to support drug development
  • Pharmacovigilance and risk management oversight
  • Coordination of inspections and good clinical/manufacturing practices

The EMA's primary concern is the scientific quality, safety, and efficacy of medicinal products. While it does not pre-approve promotional content, it exercises substantial influence over promotional activities through its approved product information, particularly the Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC), which serves as the authoritative source for all promotional claims.

Timeline considerations: EMA regulatory processes typically take 12-18 months for initial marketing authorisation applications, with scientific advice procedures taking 2-3 months. Post-marketing variations can take 2-12 months depending on complexity.
What is the ABPI?

The Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry is the UK trade body for innovative pharmaceutical companies. It sets ethical and operational standards for the promotion of prescription medicines through its Code of Practice.

Key functions:
  • Publishes and maintains the ABPI Code of Practice, enforced by the Prescription Medicines Code of Practice Authority (PMCPA)
  • Represents the industry in health policy and market access discussions
  • Supports industry training, education, and cross-sector collaboration
  • Operates Disclosure UK for transparency reporting

Unlike the EMA, the ABPI does not authorise medicines or evaluate safety data. Its focus is on ethical marketing practices and maintaining trust between pharmaceutical companies and healthcare professionals. While technically voluntary, the ABPI Code has quasi-regulatory status in the UK pharmaceutical industry, with most companies required to comply as a condition of ABPI membership.

Areas of overlap

Although their mandates differ, the EMA and ABPI interact in several meaningful ways:

Product information integrity

Promotional claims must align with the product's Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC), which is approved as part of the EMA marketing authorisation process. The ABPI Code explicitly requires that promotional material does not exceed the scope or contradict the SmPC, creating a direct link between regulatory approval and promotional compliance.

Post-marketing updates

The EMA may require changes to labelling, contraindications, or warnings based on new safety data. The ABPI Code demands prompt and accurate communication of such updates to healthcare professionals through both non-promotional and promotional channels, typically within 48-72 hours of notification.

Reference data and substantiation

EMA-approved data form the primary evidence base for promotional claims. The ABPI Code requires that claims be balanced, factual, and capable of substantiation, making EMA-reviewed documents the natural foundation for promotional review and certification.

Key differences
Area EMA ABPI
Role Regulatory agency Trade association with quasi-regulatory function
Legal Authority Binding EU-level decisions Industry code with significant commercial consequences
Scope Safety, efficacy, market authorisation Ethical promotion, industry standards, transparency
Promotional Material Oversight Indirect but substantial via SmPC and product licence Direct via Code of Practice and certification
Enforcement Regulatory sanctions, market withdrawal PMCPA rulings, public sanctions, reputational damage
Jurisdiction EU/EEA (excluding UK post-2021) United Kingdom
Appeal Process Administrative review and EU courts PMCPA Appeal Board
Timeline Months to years for major decisions Days to weeks for promotional review
Best practices for promotional material review under EMA requirements

While the EMA does not approve promotional material, compliance with its outputs is essential. Promotional content must be scientifically accurate, non-misleading, and consistent with the SmPC.

Core practices:
  • Use the approved SmPC as the authoritative baseline: Avoid extrapolating beyond authorised claims or suggesting broader efficacy than demonstrated
  • Establish proactive regulatory monitoring: Implement systems to track regulatory updates and post-marketing commitments within 24-48 hours of publication
  • Maintain strict off-label boundaries: Do not imply unapproved uses through selective data presentation, audience targeting, or contextual suggestion
  • Ensure balanced risk-benefit presentation: Include appropriate safety information proportional to efficacy claims
  • Engage regulatory affairs early and continuously: Involve regulatory experts from content conception through final approval, not just sign-off
  • Document regulatory rationale: Maintain clear records linking promotional claims to specific SmPC sections and supporting data
  • Plan for post-authorisation changes: Build flexibility into promotional strategies to accommodate potential label updates
Best practices for promotional review under the ABPI code

Promotional material in the UK must adhere to the ABPI Code of Practice. The PMCPA can investigate complaints and issue public sanctions that significantly impact company reputation and market access.

Comprehensive compliance framework:
  • Implement rigorous internal review processes: Require sign-off from medical, legal, and regulatory reviewers with documented ABPI Code training
  • Ensure claims are balanced and substantiated: Use peer-reviewed publications, regulatory assessments, and avoid cherry-picking favorable data
  • Use clear, unambiguous language: Avoid exaggeration, unqualified comparisons, and ensure claims are immediately understandable to the target audience
  • Maintain strict separation of promotional and educational content: Clearly distinguish marketing materials from medical education, with different approval processes
  • Comply with Disclosure UK requirements: Report all transfers of value to healthcare professionals within specified timeframes
  • Establish comprehensive documentation: Maintain detailed records of development, review, approval, and distribution decisions
  • Provide regular, role-specific training: Ensure commercial, medical, and regulatory teams receive updated ABPI Code training at least annually
  • Address digital and social media considerations: Apply Code principles to online activities, including third-party content and interactive platforms
  • Implement adverse event reporting procedures: Ensure promotional activities don't interfere with pharmacovigilance obligations
Understanding PMCPA enforcement: PMCPA sanctions, while not legally binding, carry significant consequences including public censure, mandatory corrective actions, audit requirements, and reputational damage that can affect market access and stakeholder relationships.
Post-Brexit environment: navigating dual regulatory pathways

The UK's departure from the EU on January 31, 2020, with the transition period ending December 31, 2020, fundamentally changed the regulatory landscape:

Current regulatory structure:
  • UK: MHRA serves as the independent regulatory body, with the ABPI Code remaining the standard for promotional practices
  • EU/EEA: EMA continues to regulate medicine authorisation for the remaining 27 EU member states plus EEA countries
  • Dual compliance requirement: Companies seeking both UK and EU market access must navigate parallel but distinct regulatory processes

Practical implications: Separate marketing authorisation applications may be required for UK (MHRA) and EU (EMA) markets. Promotional materials may need different versions to reflect jurisdiction-specific approved product information. Post-marketing safety updates may have different timing and content requirements. Companies must maintain expertise in both regulatory systems while ensuring consistent global messaging.

Transition considerations: Some products authorised before Brexit may have grandfathering provisions, but new products and major variations typically require separate submissions.
International context and global considerations

For multinational pharmaceutical companies, EMA and ABPI frameworks must be considered alongside other regulatory requirements:

Key international interactions:
  • FDA coordination: Align promotional strategies across EU, UK, and US markets while respecting jurisdictional differences
  • ICH guidelines: Leverage international harmonisation where possible for efficiency
  • Global safety reporting: Ensure promotional activities support rather than complicate worldwide pharmacovigilance obligations
Digital age considerations

Modern promotional activities increasingly involve digital channels that present unique compliance challenges:

Digital-specific requirements:
  • Social media governance: Apply traditional promotional principles to dynamic online environments
  • Third-party content: Maintain responsibility for promotional content shared or endorsed by others
  • Data privacy: Ensure promotional activities comply with GDPR and UK data protection requirements
  • Measurement and monitoring: Implement systems to track and evaluate digital promotional effectiveness while maintaining compliance
Conclusion

The EMA governs what a medicine can claim based on rigorous scientific evaluation, while the ABPI Code governs how those claims are communicated ethically and responsibly in the UK market. In the post-Brexit environment, companies must navigate these frameworks alongside other international requirements while maintaining consistent, compliant messaging.

Pharmaceutical companies must ensure promotional content is scientifically accurate, legally compliant, and ethically sound. This requires deep understanding of both the regulatory foundation provided by EMA authorisation and the promotional standards enforced through the ABPI Code. Success depends on early engagement with regulatory and compliance expertise, robust internal processes, and continuous monitoring of evolving requirements.

Effective navigation of these frameworks reduces regulatory risk, supports sustainable market access, and maintains essential trust with healthcare stakeholders while enabling companies to communicate the value of their medicines to patients and healthcare professionals.


Processing... Check in later

Ready to transform your promotional material review process?

Contact us today to learn how ApprovalFlow can help you achieve faster approvals, enhanced compliance, and improved efficiency.