Panel · Use case · Brand & Marketing
Launch Claims Round Table.
LiveRound TableConvene compliance, brand, regulatory and medical information on which claims a launch campaign can make.
Launch Claims Round Table is a ready-made use case for Brand & Marketing. It ships under the Round Table template.
For brand and compliance leads. You get each discipline's view in its own terms, where they connect and disagree, what none covered and what the deliberation does not settle. This is context for review, not legal advice. Claims are cited or marked as gaps.
Add it to your library to reuse from New → From template. Edit the saved copy in your library on the service form.
The decision
Which claims can a prescription medicine launch campaign make?
Who is at the table
In the United States, prescription drug advertising must not be false or misleading, must present a fair balance of risk and benefit, and must be consistent with the approved labeling. The panel works from the regulation and the agency’s promotion office.
| Seat | What it is asked | What it works from |
|---|---|---|
| Global Commercial Compliance Officer | Which claims are supported, which need qualification, and which are off limits.1,2 | 21 CFR 202.1 and the agency’s promotion guidance. |
| Global Brand Lead | Which claims carry the positioning and what the campaign loses if a claim is cut. | Positioning research and the approved label. |
| Regulatory Strategist | How each claim maps to the approved labeling and the pivotal evidence.1 | The label and the review documents. |
| Medical Information Services Master | How questions beyond the label are handled and where the line between promotion and response lies. | Practice for unsolicited requests. |
What the round table does
The label is the boundary. The panel maps each proposed claim to the approved labeling and marks those that go beyond it. Where a claim needs substantiation, the report says what would support it.1
Other regions apply other rules. Outside the US the panel uses the relevant code, for example the EFPIA Code in Europe, and does not carry US conclusions across.3
Compliance and brand pull in different directions. The report shows the trade-off for each disputed claim and the compliance seat’s reasoning, and leaves the decision to the company’s own review process.
Recommended length
Standard
Four disciplines bear on this question. Standard depth gives each a seat, with the table of connections and the dissent, in about four pages.
You can pick another length on the form. The other two stay available.
Assumptions the round table checks
The round table states the assumptions each seat relies on, and says what each gap limits. Examples for this question:
- The approved labeling matches the claims in the draft campaign.
- The evidence supporting a comparative claim meets the substantiation standard.
- Medical information will not be used to extend promotion.
Standards, guidance and sources
Rules
The decision practice behind the memo itself is on the template page.
What gets flagged
Any claim that goes beyond the label, any comparative claim without head-to-head evidence, and any claim a seat says it cannot support.
What arrives
- The question, and who was asked
- Where the panel lands
- What each discipline says
- Where the disciplines connect
- Where they disagree, and why it matters
- What none of them covered
- What changes, and what this does not cover
What it will not do
It is a deliberation of AI specialists and not a vote of human experts. It reports where they land and where they split, and the decision stays with you.
This is context for your review, not legal advice, and it is not a substitute for the company’s promotional review.
It is not a vote of human experts. Every seat is an AI specialist, and the report says so.
It does not add a seat that did not speak or invent a quote or a number.
It does not decide. It sets out the views, the dissent and the gaps for you to decide.
References
- [1] Code of Federal Regulations. 21 CFR 202.1: Prescription-drug advertisements. Known from the eCFR; the text was not read in this pass.
- [2] U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Office of Prescription Drug Promotion (OPDP). Known from FDA’s site; not read in full.
- [3] European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations. EFPIA Code of Practice on the promotion of prescription-only medicines to, and interactions with, healthcare professionals. The Code was confirmed in an earlier review of its PDF; this page link was not opened.
Links checked 9 October 2026
These are the sources the template drew on. None of their authors or issuers has reviewed it.
About the Panel service
Each panelist answers in their own voice, then the discussion is drawn together. You get the question and who was in the room, every position in full, what they agreed on, where they split, and what follows. Disagreements are written down rather than smoothed into a consensus nobody actually holds, because the split is usually the part you needed.
To edit a saved template, open New → Panel → From template, or the library rail on the service form.