This New Engagement Model Garners Significant Rewards For Pharma

Last year, on July 26, 2021, I wrote in this blog on gaining a competitive edge with Omnichannel pharma marketing Omnichannel pharma marketing. However, from several recent studies, it appears, it’s still remains in a nascent stage. Most players in the industry haven’t been able to get there, just yet.

This is evident from a paper, published in the Reuters Events on November 08, 2022. It underscored, ‘But few, perhaps none, can say they have yet mastered omnichannel. A 360-degree view of the customer remains a work in progress. The seamless customer experience that physicians have come to expect in their private lives as customers in retail, finance, or hospitality, remains an aspiration.’

That said, the good news is – today – with rapidly declining Covid-19 onslaught, many drug companies have realized that their earlier assumption of ‘we know what our customers want,’ is invalid in the emerging perspective. Thus, it is foolhardy for their marketing strategy planners to believe that have a 360-degree view of their customers. This realization has prompted several companies to find out, based on the data, what the key customers’ needs are and engage with them accordingly.

In this article, I shall, therefore, reemphasize for the consideration of the young marketers that Omnichannel customer engagement, including patients and doctors, would help fetch significant and sustained financial rewards for drug companies.

However, another visualization of 6 years ago seems to have come true:

About 6 years ago, on December 26, 2016, I visualized in this blog: ‘a majority of the doctors’ choices in India would, possibly, involve MRs, while a good number of other important doctors’ choices may probably be independent of them. Nevertheless, from this emerging trend, it’s clear now that multi-channel engagement would be a new normal in pharma sales and marketing, sooner than later.’

This visualization seems to have come true by a great extent, as vindicated by the above study of the Reuters Events. It confirms, currently, most companies are stuck in multi-channel content delivery and, in fact, are still a long way of enjoying the benefits of truly aligned – Omnichannel engagement. This brings us to the question: ‘What’s the difference between Multi-Channel and Omnichannel content delivery strategy for customer engagement?’

Difference between Multi-Channel and Omnichannel content delivery strategy:

The article published in the Pharmaceutical Executive, on June 30, 2021, indicated: ‘An integrated strategy based on Omnichannel marketing is now increasingly replacing multichannel marketing.’

Nonetheless, in my article of July 26, 2021, I highlighted, although both omnichannel and multichannel engagement will be able to deliver targeted contents to patients through several interactive digital platforms, these two aren’t the same. Omnichannel approach connects these channels, including smartphone-based Apps, specially formatted websites, social media, community, and the likes – bridging technology-communication gaps that may exist in multichannel solutions.

Notably, any change from the fragmented and siloed multichannel approach to Omnichannel marketing would entail simultaneous orchestration of channels across personal, non-personal, and media. Besides orchestration of channels, the message of course, needs to be unified, interrelated – without being repetitive. From this perspective: ‘Bringing the channels and stakeholders together in a truly integrated manner is the pivotal shift required to break through today’s noisy and crowded pharmaceutical marketplace,’ as the above Pharmaceutical Executive article concluded.

More and more people are charting the digital space:

Fast increasing penetration into the cyberspace by a large section of the population, especially in the healthcare space – triggered by Covid related lockdowns, is now all pervasive. An increasing number of people now want to know more and more about various disease states, their treatment and prevention options, in the digital space. Patients and healthcare providers’ key requirements include, where to get the right information from, and how.

Information-needs expanding beyond disease or drug efficacy and safety:

A discussion, arranged by the Fingerpaint Group and published in the Fierce Pharma on November 14, 2022, covered some interesting points in this area. It acknowledged that in the digital space: “You’ve got the efficacy, the safety information, all that.” The discussion then pointed out: “But for a consumer, it’s a different type of journey. It’s, how do I learn more about the disease I’m dealing with? What is it I want to know, not only either for me, or if I’m a caregiver for somebody in my family, even, how do I help support them?”

Thus, it comes out clearly that patients’ or care givers’ quest for information isn’t just about the disease, it’s also about the quality of information that will help the person, as a whole. The drug companies, I reckon, should now accept it as one of their responsibilities. As one of the participants in this discussion said, ‘finding ways to reach everybody in the whole continuum so that they’re educated and informed, so that they can make better decisions for themselves,’ are imperatives for the marketers.

Personal detailing or other personal engagements don’t become irrelevant: 

Omnichannel approach doesn’t make traditional in-person detailing or other personal engagements irrelevant or obsolete. However, those alone, will no longer help a pharma player to achieve performance excellence. The new challenge is how does a company get to the right audience, get the right product to the right patient, or caregivers, amongst this vast ocean of digital noise.

Moreover, the ongoing digital push – beyond several essential personal outreach, will only accelerate in different ways. Omnichannel customer engagement, based on their own terms of engagement, including time, speed, and quality of information, will be the name of the new the game for success.

Many pharma companies aren’t sure where to start, But…

McKinsey & Company in a paper, published on January 05, 2022, also said so. It observed: ‘An analytics-enabled omnichannel commercial model can elevate HCP engagement, but many pharma companies are not sure where to start.’ However, it reiterated: ‘An analytics-enabled omnichannel commercial model can create value; Companies should start now.’

Thus, many pharma marketers may require hand-holding by domain experts, at least, to begin with. However, selection of experts being the key, should go through a structured validation process, including their previous success record in this initiative. As I articulated above, the challenge remains, how does a company use Omnichannel platform to engage the right customers with the right products and associated details, navigating through the noisy cyberspace.

That said, it won’t be unfair to acknowledge that many pharma companies are moving in the right direction.

But many pharma companies are moving in the right direction:

As I mentioned in my article of May 31, 2021: COVID-19 is driving lasting changes in what HCPs need and value,’ found the Accenture Healthcare Provider Survey May 2020, named – ‘Reinventing Relevance.’ Several physicians from the US, Europe and Asia were found to have experienced a significant change taking place in many pharma companies’ communication with them – going much beyond just product information.

Accenture’s follow-up study in August 2020 also reiterated, ‘pharma companies have improved how they engage with healthcare providers during Covid-19.’ It, therefore, appears that the new value expectations of many physicians are being met with a newer value delivery model, significantly deviating from pre-Covid practices.

However, in the above article, I discussed about value delivery through content – not about the channels used.

Conclusion:

The paper by McKinsey & Company, as mentioned above, also indicates another important point. While channels to engage HCPs and other customers are proliferating, the line between online and offline engagement is rapidly blurring. It further adds, managing this imperative has become more and more overwhelming for sales reps. The reason being, they “have traditionally relied on their ‘instincts’ to build relationships with HCPs.

It is now becoming challenging even for many experienced reps to tailor and optimize today’s complex mix of channels, content, and frequency of interactions for individual HCPs, the paper underscores. Which is why, today, transforming the existing commercial model is considered both inevitable and urgent, and:

“Pioneers that have adopted analytics and omnichannel approaches as part of their commercial model have garnered significant rewards.” the paper concluded.

By: Tapan J. Ray      

Disclaimer: The views/opinions expressed in this article are entirely my own, written in my individual and personal capacity. I do not represent any other person or organization for this opinion.

 

Leveraging Data Science To Deliver Unique Patient-experience

“Changes in consumer behavior, many of which were accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic, are fueling a redesign of the health ecosystem.” This finding was revealed by a recent study of the PwC’s Health Research Institute (HRI). The research provided insights about how and why specific groups of consumers used health services during the pandemic – from mental health and telehealth to in-home care and other non-traditional care sites.

The study also captured ‘their willingness to use them again in the future,’ and suggested, those pharma companies that closely monitor these consumer signals and design, accordingly, will likely emerge as more customer centric, as the pandemic wanes.

From this perspective, effective application of data science for creating a unique patient experience by listening to patient voice, is now an imperative for pharma players. Which is why, this approach is nowa key business success ingredient in the changing paradigm. It helps offering a holistic disease treatment solution to patients searching for an effective and affordable disease treatment process.

This article will, therefore, focus on leveraging data science for strategic use of Real-World Evidence (RWE) based on Real World Data (RWD) – on how customer characteristics and behavior impact health outcomes. This initiative is fast becoming a key driver to excel in contemporary pharma business.

Strategic use of RWD/RWE increasing in pharma marketing plans:

RWE, as the name suggests, is the evidence derived from RWD. These are collected outside of clinical trials from various sources, such as, patients and HCP surveys on treatment outcomes, electronic health records wherever available, Wearable Health Devices (WHD), insurance claims, data from connected healthcare records, custom study and many others.

The McKinsey & Company article in this area, published on July 23, 2020, also indicated so. Although, some leading pharma companies have already been using RWE. However, recent progress in digital and advanced analytics allows it to be employed in new ways to deliver impact at scale, the article highlighted. When used by hands-on- professionals of repute in this area, RWE can help pharma marketers understand how patient characteristics and behaviors affect health outcomes.

The research paper on how Biopharmaceutical companies are embedding real-world data and evidence use across the enterprise, published in Deloitte Insights on September 21, 2022, presented an interesting contemporary example. It wrote: ‘During the COVID-19 pandemic, RWD/E played a key role in enabling Biopharma companies to innovate and bring novel vaccines and therapies against this highly contagious disease to market in record time.’id-19,

The approach gained momentum during the Covid-19 pandemic:

The above research study of Deloitte brought out this fact succinctly. It found; unprecedented challenge posed by COVID-19 pandemic prompted several drug companies to leverage RWD/E to innovate faster than ever before. More than half of the companies surveyed by Deloitte used RWD/E to understand the incidence and severity of COVID-19 and its variants for vaccine and drug development.’

The survey found: ‘Many vaccine developers, such as Johnson & Johnson analyzed RWD to predict COVID-19 hotspots across geographies to optimize site selection and collect data from diverse racial and ethnic groups.’ Besides, RWE also played a critical role for these companies in understanding vaccine effectiveness across demographics such as age, gender, race, and ethnicity and determining the need for boosters.

Improves patient experience for business excellence:

A systematic and ongoing tracking and analysis of well-identified RWD, by pharma marketing analytics professionals, can help in-depth understanding of changing pharma customer characteristics and behavior, more precisely. Such initiatives include patients, HCPs, hospitals and even the policy makers. Several drug majors have adopted this practice, immediately after absorbing the initial shock of unprecedented disruptions during the Covid-19 pandemic.

Similarly, RWD can help map the exact available space for demand where a brand is being used and potential competitive value-space for its further demand extension – based on real time customer behavior with changing characteristics. To shape customer journeys, such findings may immensely help while strategizing for more targeted content delivery, with sharper segmentation and brand positioning.

Therefore, finding such gaps in various areas of patients’ journey – in their search for an effective and affordable treatment, and appropriately filling these up with brand value delivery is critical. This will help improve patient experience manifold, accelerating business excellence, in tandem.

A recent paper titled, ‘Maximizing your role as a newly appointed real-world evidence leader,’ published by the ZS on March 23, 2022, made similar observations, as above. The study reiterated that patient-generated insights obtained through RWE, are uniquely capable of adding value at different stages of a pharma brand’s life cycle. Or, throughout a patient’s journey on the care pathway of the value delivery system. It concluded: “Carrying out a successful RWE study is a fine balancing act – but its inconveniences and risks are almost certain to be outweighed by the eventual benefits.”

Increasingly used to gain actionable insights to improve patient experience:

In the contemporary market dynamics – driven by changing customer characteristics and behavior, several pharma companies are now effectively combining and analyzing RWD to retrieve RWE. The objective is to gain actionable insights for effective customer engagement for better patient outcomes, to drive business growth. According to a recent podcast by PwC on using data to shape customer journey, the process includes the following:

  • Focusing on the value and outcomes of treatment protocols and less about specific products.
  • Gaining a better understanding of pharma customers and what drives their behavior.
  • Reaching beyond the barrier in driving differentiation amongst competitors.

Conclusion:   

The Forbes article on the Data Science trend in 2022, published on October 04, 2021, aptly epitomized its relevance in today’s business, including pharma industry. It articulated, data science encompasses the practical application of ideas generated by credible and meaningful data from various relevant sources, predictive analytics, and artificial intelligence. Our ability to use such data to our advantage across wide areas in business, would help deliver increasingly worthwhile, valuable, and enjoyable patient experience. 

The article also underscored: ‘If data is the oil of the information age and Machine Learning (ML) is the engine, then data science is the digital domain’s equivalent of the laws of physics that cause combustion to occur and pistons to move.’

Thus, I reckon, both intrinsic and extrinsic brand value creation process, driven by its effectiveness, would increasingly call for Real World Evidence (RWE) based on top-quality Real-World Data (RWD). This is increasingly becoming so critical for success – spanning right across, from product development, launch planning with value propositions – to launch and beyond.

The core purpose of leveraging data science in pharma is, as I see it, is effective decision making throughout the brand life cycle, to deliver a unique patient experience in patients’ journey – with better treatment outcomes.

By: Tapan J. Ray      

Disclaimer: The views/opinions expressed in this article are entirely my own, written in my individual and personal capacity. I do not represent any other person or organization for this opinion.

Big Pharma Fails Avoiding Drug Price ‘Control’? Even In The US? Why?

It ultimately happened – even in the United States, as the US President signed a bill on August 16, 2022 that aims to reduce healthcare costs, alongside fighting climate change, besides raising taxes on the rich. This new law was enacted, despite powerful lobbying and the vehement opposition of big pharma associations and that too in their home turf.

According to the Fierce Pharma report of the same day, since the current US President moved into the White House in 2020, the drug industry left no stone unturned battling to preserve pricing status-quo. It further added, the ‘pharmaceutical industry, including, PhRMA, its allies, and the nation’s largest pharmaceutical firms’ have spent more than $205 million in multi-media ads opposing ‘Medicare price negotiations’ and lobbying against efforts to lower drug prices for consumers.’

No wonder, when the bill was just introduced to the US lawmakers, big pharma’s disappointment on the bill was palpable. This gets well-captured in what the AbbVie CEO pointed out at that time. He said, ‘the legislation would force manufacturers to accept the government’s proposed price or face a harsh tax on their revenues from a given product.’ He also said: “So, it’s not a negotiation,” as stated in the bill. He further opined in his conference call: “We should just call it what it is. It’s price controls,’ which is what the lawmakers are ‘basically putting in place, if the language stays the same,’ the AbbVie chief added.

Capturing this new development in the United States, at least, in the recent past - Fierce Pharma in its August 08, 2022, issue commented: “The seemingly unstoppable pharma lobbying force has lost its charm. With the passage of a new bill, the U.S. Senate is opening the door to major drug pricing reform, leaving the drug industry licking its wounds.”

In the Eldorado of the global drug industry, this is indeed an unprecedented initiative to significantly reduce costs of many important drugs and reduce patients’ out of pocket expenses. Consequently, it has created so much of hullabaloo, across the world, for various reasons. In this article, I shall track this emerging scenario along with the message that it sends across the globe, and its possible impact on new drug innovation to meet unmet needs of patients. In India, one such area could be revisiting the price negotiation proposal for patented drugs, a government initiative that failed to take off earlier.

Would lowering prices stifle new drug innovation?

The apprehension, I reckon, that big pharma will continue to play with - price control will stifle new product innovation – adversely impacting patient interest. Notably, to many industry experts, this argument doesn’t just lack robustness, seems more a conjecture rather than the outcome of any peer- reviewed research study findings. On ewthe contrary, several highly credible and independent studies prove otherwise. Thus, let me put hereunder:

  • One – what big pharma directly and through their powerful industry associations or some financially sponsored studies are saying
  • And – what the top experts concluded from their independent analysis in this regard, as published in the globally acclaimed journals.

I leave it to my readers to evaluate the credibility of each to form their views.

Drug industry arguments supported by recent studies:

The findings of a study conducted recently, with the financial support of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), the Biotechnology Innovation Organization (BIO), Amgen, Pfizer, Alexion, AbbVie, Genentech, and Bristol Myers Squibb, were released by PhRMA on November 23, 2021. The study was conducted by Vital Transformation. The key findings of this study highlighted: ‘Every 10% drop in the price of medicines in price-controlled EU markets was associated with a:

  • 14% decrease in total VC funding (10% early stage and 17% late stage)
  • 7% decrease in biotech patents
  • 9% decrease in biotech start-up funding relative to the US
  • An 8% increase in the delay of access to medicines.

It concluded: ‘Drug pricing controls implemented in the US would likely have an even greater impact on Biopharma KPIs given its global leadership in investment and innovation.’

Independent expert studies, published in highly reputed journals:

Around the same time as the above report, an independent study published in the Harvard Business Review (HBR) on October 01, 2021, found exactly the opposite. It categorically stated: ‘The U.S. can lower drug prices without sacrificing innovation.’

The paper summed up: ‘With Congress considering legislation to allow Medicare to use its bargaining power to negotiate lower drug prices, large pharmaceutical companies are once again waging a campaign that contends that doing so would seriously harm the development of breakthrough drugs. This is not true. Smaller companies now account for the lion’s share of such breakthroughs. The key to supporting drug innovation is to increase NIH funding of the efforts that give rise to these new companies, cut the costs, and accelerate the speed of clinical trials, and reform patent law.’

Drug pricing in the Indian context:

Prices of, especially, new drugs and the overall cost of healthcare are two major concerns – more in the developing countries like India. Responding to this need drug price control for pre-defined essential medicines are already in place in the country. More recent studies further vindicate the relevance of such regulation from the perspective of affordability of drugs for the poorer section of the society, and where out of pocket expenses are very high.

Let me quote one such paper, published on June 04, 2022, which received no outside financial support from this study, where the researchers concluded: ‘With induced demand and an inadequate competitive environment, the pharmaceutical industry fails to reduce prices. Supply-chain trade margins are very high. Hence, government intervention through price control of essential and life-saving drugs is a necessity in India.’

In this context, another question that is being raised – are there other alternatives to expand access to high-priced life-saving drugs at an affordable cost to all those who need those most? The most common alternative that floats, encourage more competition for those drugs as soon as they go off patent. Let me examine what’s big pharma players are doing in that area.

Does Big Pharma encourage increasing competition to reduce drug prices?

Another way to reduce the price of an expensive product is encouraging competition to enable market forces bring down the price. An interesting article on breaking the rule of drug pricing by pharma companies was published in the Forbes magazine on June 29, 2022. I also wrote on June 10, 2013: ‘To scale-up access to health care, especially for the marginalized population of any country, greater access to affordable generic drugs will always remain fundamental, besides improving healthcare infrastructure and its delivery mechanism.’

Thus, there should be a robust mechanism, across the world, to facilitate quick entry of cheaper generic equivalents immediately after patent expiry of the original molecule. Increasing attempts of blocking entry of generics surreptitiously by vested interests, leaves no other alternative, but price control. This is imperative, ‘as without the availability of newer generics, unmet medical needs of the most vulnerable section of the society cannot be met effectively by any country, as I wrote there.

Attempts to game the system to minimize competition continue unabated:

Even after my article, this red flag is being raised for quite some time. It will be evident from another Harvard Business Review article titled, ‘How Pharma Companies Game the System to Keep Drugs Expensive,’ published in the on April 06, 2017. Acknowledging: ‘Drug development is risky and expensive, thanks to the long testing and approval process,’ the author concluded from their study – ‘But, increasingly, makers of branded drugs are using a variety of tactics to extend their exclusive rights,’ enabling them to maintain high drug prices for much longer time.

More recently, the above Forbes article of June 10, 2022 also highlighted, ‘even the most generous patent protections come to an end and companies must face the potential for generic competition. That’s when major drug manufacturers shift tactics from influencing policy to crushing the competition.’ There are several legal and semi-legal approaches that big pharma players adapt to game the system and maintain pricing monopoly. Let’s recap it with just three of these examples:

- ‘Patent Thicket: Delaying entry of lower price off-patent molecule through a Patent Thicket. This involves creation of ‘a dense web of overlapping intellectual property rights that a generic pharma company must hack its way through in order to actually commercialize new technology of a drug molecule,’ even after the original patent expires. For example, AbbVie’s Humira, the world’s best-selling drug for a long time. I also discussed this issue in my blog over three years ago – on April 22, 2019.

- ‘Pay-for-delay deals’:  I discussed this issue in this blog on June 19, 2013. Moreover, the above Forbes article of June 29, 2022, also underscored this tactic. It explained that this is a deal in which drug companies agree not to compete for a set amount of time to maintain high prices of their brand-name drugs. The article, published in Bloomberg Law on February 20, 2020, captures it nicely.

- Authorized generics: As many would know, law permits six months of exclusivity to the first generic version of an off-patent new molecule coming into the market. Interestingly, just before patent expiry of an innovative drug, several drug makers roll out their own generics to stifle competition. Although, they keep different names for the generic versions, but pricing remains almost similar. Such a practice obliviously delays the entry of cheaper generics, at least by six months.

In this scenario, the new drug prices continue racing north. Something was to be surely done – for patients’ sake, as many believe, at least, where it all started – the US.

New drug prices are highest in 2022:

As reported by Reuters on August 16, 2022:

  • Eight of 13 drugs launched in 2022 priced over $200,000 per year
  • Median annual price for new U.S. drugs this year is $257,000
  • Some drugmakers disclose less information on pricing

Despite this, as reported on August 15, 2022: ‘The main U.S. drug lobby has said it will push back against the legislation, which includes policies that drug makers have opposed for decades.’

Conclusion:

The significance of the above development in the US healthcare scenario, was aptly summed-up by the US House Speaker, as she said: “If you are sitting at your kitchen table and wonder how you’re going to pay the bills – your health care bills, your prescription drug bills – this bill is for you.” For the first time in the US – the champion of champions of free-drug pricing market, will negotiate the drug price with their manufacturers to become patient -centric.

The reverberations of this difficult decision, especially on new drug prices, are expected to prompt the need for price negotiation or price control, primarily for expanding access to new drugs for a larger number of patients. This deserves to be a focus area for the Government, including India. Moreover, the August 18, 2022, media report also suggests that the top court of India may now encourage the Government to investigate, report and take remedial action on drug industry malpractices.

Finally, it’s worth noting that over a decade ago, international media widely reported -  ‘India considering price controls for patented drugs.’ Its objective was to address the aggressive new drug pricing trend in the country. Accordingly, the price negotiation proposal for patented drugs was notified by the Department of Pharmaceuticals (DoP) in 2007. The constituted Committee submitted a report, as well, on February 21, 2013. But it did not take off as on date. Many apprehend, this is due to intensive and ongoing lobbying by big pharma, just as what happened in the US. Nevertheless, the question that surfaces – will the above new drug law in the largest pharma market in the world encourage the DoP to revisit price negotiation for patented drugs - to make modern drugs affordable to a larger patient population in India – now?

By: Tapan J. Ray

Disclaimer: The views/opinions expressed in this article are entirely my own, written in my individual and personal capacity. I do not represent any other person or organization for this opinion.

Unfettered ‘Access To Drug Innovation’ – An Oxymoron?

The mass paranoia, as it were, over Covid pandemic has now started fading with drug regulators’ ‘emergency approval’ of several Covid -19 vaccines, and its free of cost access to all, generally in most countries. As the endgame of the pandemic, supposedly, depends on the speed of Covid-19 vaccination, the drug industry’s public reputation in the interim period, driven by its rapid response to the crisis, got an unsurprising boost (62%). This was captured by the Harris Poll, released on March 15, 2021.

Interestingly, soon after the high of 62% approval rating, the decline began. It came down to 60% in May and then 56% in June 2021—and now down three more percentage points, according to the Harris Polls that followed. No wonder, why the FiercePharma article of August 24, 2021, carried a caption: ’Pharma’s reputation drops again. Could it foreshadow a return to the bottom?’

Further, in the new normal, especially when customer expectations and requirements from drug companies have significantly changed, MNC Pharma industry still appears to be in the old normal mode in this space. It still, reportedly, ‘believes that the need for innovation must be balanced with the necessity for more accessible medicines, within a robust IP and regulatory environment,’ in India.

The hidden purpose of the same could possibly be, as several industry watchers believe – availing benefits of greater access to one kind innovation, making access to other kind of innovation more difficult. Consequently, two critical points are reemerging, even in the new normal, as follows:

  • Aren’t Indian IP and regulatory ecosystems still conducive enough for MNC pharma players’ access to drug innovation?
  • In the name of greater access to pharma product innovation, are they creating barriers to pharma process innovation, delaying market access to complex generics and Biosimilar drugs – besides systematically eroding consumer confidence on such products?

In this article, under the above backdrop, I shall try to explore why the epithet – ‘access to drug innovation’ is considered an oxymoron – with contemporary examples from around the word, including India.

Aren’t Indian IP and regulatory ecosystems conducive to drug innovation? 

This allegation doesn’t seem to hold much water, as several successful local initiatives in Covid-19 vaccine development will confirm the same. Besides, already marketed Covaxin, developed by Bharat Biotech in collaboration with the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) and Zydus Cadila’s ZyCov-D, there are several others waiting in the wings. These include domestic drug makers like, Hyderabad based Biological-E, Bengaluru-based medical pharma startup’s – Mynvax, and Pune-based Gennova Biopharmaceutical’s m-RNA vaccine candidates. However, only critical difference is – Indian made Covid vaccines are more affordable and accessible to patients, as against those manufactured by MNCs, such as, Pfizer, Moderna and J&J.

If we look back to the old normal, one will also find similar instances of new drug discovery in India, which deliberated in my article of September 02, 2013. Let me give just a couple of examples below:

  • Ranbaxy developed and launched its first homegrown ‘New Drug’ for malariaSynriam, on April 25, 2012
  • Zydus Cadila announced in June 2013 that the company is ready for launch in India its first New Chemical Entity (NCE) for the treatment of diabetic dyslipidemia –Lipaglyn.

Hence, meager wherewithal for R&D notwithstanding, as compared to the MNCs, Indian pharma players don’t seem to find the country’s IP and regulatory ecosystems not conducive to innovation of affordable new drugs with wider patient access.

Off-patent drugs also involve another type of major innovation:

Discovering an NCE is, unquestionably, a product of drug innovation. Similarly, developing a new – cost-effective, non-infringing manufacturing process to market off-patent drugs, like biosimilars, also involve another type of major innovation. Intriguingly, when the MNC pharma industry talks about ‘access to innovation’, the latter type of innovation isn’t publicly acknowledged and included in their drug innovation spectrum. This practice, reportedly, remains unchanged in their advocacy campaign, even in the new normal.

However, the fact is, the manufacturers of off-patent drugs, such as biosimilars, also need to follow a major innovative process, for which they require access to innovation. This was also captured in an editorial of the newsletter – Biosimilar Development. The deliberation addressed the question - Do biosimilars fit into the innovation paradigm? The editor began by articulating – hardly anyone publicly argues that the development of new manufacturing process of Biosimilar drugs is not an innovation. The industry can’t call them as a copy of an existing innovation, either.

This is also vindicated in the Amgen paper, published on February 11, 2018. It acknowledges, “Unlike small molecule generic drugs, biosimilars are not identical to the reference biologic or to other approved biosimilars of the same reference biologic, because they are developed using different cell lines and undergo different manufacturing and purification processes.” Moreover, biosimilars also carry a different International Nonproprietary Name (INN), because of their molecular differences from the reference drug. This has been specified in the nonproprietary naming Guidance document of the US-FDA of January 2017.

From this perspective, the next question that logically follows: Is process innovation as important as product innovation?

Is process innovation as critical a capability as product innovation?

This question was unambiguously answered by a pharma industry-centric Harvard Business Review(HBR) article – ‘The New Logic of High-Tech R&D’, published in its September–October 1995, issue. The paper emphasized, for the commercial success of a product ‘manufacturing-process innovation is becoming an increasingly critical capability for product innovation.’

When to meet patient-needs ‘access to innovation’ an oxymoron: 

‘Access to innovation’ is an interesting epithet that is often used by many drug companies for meeting unmet needs of patients. However, the same is also often used to create barriers to meeting unmet needs of more patients with cheaper biologic drugs, like Biosimilars, immediately after their basic patent expiry. This is mostly practiced by creating a patent thicket. Hence, drug companies’ advocacy for greater access to innovation is an oxymoron to many.

The same was echoed in another article – ‘How originator companies delay generic medicines,’ published by GaBI. It wrote, such practices delay generic entry and lead to healthcare systems and consumers paying more than they would otherwise have done for medicines. These include the following:

  • Strategic patenting
  • Patent litigation
  • Patent settlements
  • Interventions before national regulatory authorities
  • Lifecycle strategies for follow-on products.

A very recent piece on the subject, published by Fierce Pharma on August 31, 2021, vindicates that the patent life extension through the patent thicket is happening on the ground – denying patients access to cheaper equivalent, especially of off-patent biologic drugs within a reasonable time period. It highlighted:

  • The exclusivity of AbbVie’s Humira, which hit the market in 2002 and generated nearly $20 billion in sales last year was extended by 130 patents.
  • The same company has applied for 165 patents for its another blockbuster Imbruvica. Launched in 2013, Imbruvica has already generated sales of $5.3 billion for AbbVie.

No wonder, why in February 2021, during a Senate Finance Committee hearing, Sen. John Cornyn blasted the company saying:

“I support drug companies recovering a profit based on their research and development of innovative drugs,” Cornyn said. “But at some point, that patent has to end, that the exclusivity has to end, to be able to get it at a much cheaper cost.”

More reports are also available on attempts to erode consumer confidence in Biosimilar drugs, as compared to the originals.

Work for innovation sans eroding consumer confidence in Biosimilars: 

Making affordable new drugs and vaccines available to patients with ‘access to innovation’, deserves inspiration from all concerned. Curiously, even in the new normal, some big companies continue trying to erode consumer confidence in off-patent drugs, especially Biosimilars and complex generics.

For example, an article on Biosimilars moving to the center stage, published in the Pharmaceutical Executive on August 12, 2021, quoted an interesting development in this space. The article highlighted that US legislators are now ‘eyeing measures to deter innovator promotional messages that disparage follow-on competitors.’ This initiative was spurred by US-FDA criticism of an Amgen promotional communication for undermining consumer confidence in Biosimilars to its Neulasta (pegfilgrastim) injection.

On July 14, 2021, US-FDA’s Office of Prescription Drug Promotion (OPDP) sent a letter to Amgen carrying a caption ‘FDA notifies Amgen of misbranding of its biological product, Neulasta, due to false or  misleading promotional communication about its product’s benefit.

The letter, as reported in the above article, criticized the company for making a false claim of greater adverse events with the injection system used by Biosimilars compared to the Amgen product. OPDP advised Amgen and other firms to “carefully evaluate the information presented in promotional materials for reference products, or Biosimilar products” to ensure correct product identification and avoid consumer confusion.

Conclusion:

When the point is, creating a conducive ecosystem to promote access to innovation, it should be patient-centric – always, and, more so in the new normal, considering changing needs and expectations of health care customers.

The innovation of usually pricey new molecular entities, no doubt, meets unmet needs of those who can afford these. Whereas, manufacturing process innovation expands access to the same molecule, particularly when they go off-patent, by making them affordable to a vast majority of the population.

But powerful industry lobby groups continue pressing harder for unfettered ‘access to innovation’ with greater relaxation of the IP and regulatory framework of countries, like India. The situation prompts striking a right balance between encouraging more profit by helping to extend patent exclusivity and encouraging greater access to off-patent cheaper Biosimilars as soon as the basic patent expires.

The bottom-line is, both need to be actively encouraged, even if it requires new laws to discourage practices like, creating patent thickets or undermining the use of generics or Biosimilars, and the likes. The good news is lawmakers have started deliberating on this issue – along with increasing public awareness, which gets reflected in the pharma industry’s current reputation ratings.

Left unresolved soon, such piggyback ride on ‘access to drug innovation’ bandwagon to serve self-serving interests, would continue denying speedy entry of cheaper Biosimilars. From this perspective, it isn’t difficult to fathom, why unfettered access to drug innovation is considered an oxymoron, by many.

By: Tapan J. Ray  

Disclaimer: The views/opinions expressed in this article are entirely my own, written in my individual and personal capacity. I do not represent any other person or organization for this opinion.

Using Selling Simulator For New Drug Launch In The New Normal

The reverberation of unparalleled business disruptions in healthcare caused by Covid pandemic, extends across its value chain – from patients and families to clinicians and pharmaceutical companies. Consequently, even many diehards or staunchly tradition-bound pharma marketers were being prompted to reimagine their marketing model, to keep the business going.

Some of these areas include, customer preferred engagement channels, platforms and associated remote or virtual training inputs – necessary for effective execution of new strategic marketing models for the evolving new normal. A few of them are also moving in this direction – garnering requisite wherewithal.

“But it has also left some of them paralyzed by uncertainty. Should they invest now in transforming their commercial model or wait to see how things play out?” This palpable dilemma of many pharma marketers, was well captured in a recent McKinsey & Company article - ‘Reshaping pharma’s strategy in the next normal,’ published on December 15, 2020.

In a situation like this, one of the critical challenges is the successful launch of new pharma products amid changing customer behavior, product expectations and other associated uncertainties. ‘As pharmaceutical companies reshape their commercial models to prepare for the uncertainties ahead, personalization and digital enablement will be crucial to launch success in the new environment,’ underscored the above article.

As many of us will know, quality training and development inputs for the same, remain a vital prerequisite before the sales force hits the marketing battle ground. Isn’t that also a challenge in the prevailing market situation? Could digitalization of the company provide a solution to this critical sales force training issue for the same, in the new normal? This article will delve into this area.

Digitalization is a basic step – the challenge is much beyond that:

As I wrote in my article dated October 07, 2019, disruptive digital transformation in pharma sales and marketing is indeed a necessary basic step. It will also help to leapfrog in the field staff training and development process by imbibing leading-edge technologies, such as AI, for giant leaps to higher growth trajectories. But, ‘Digitalization’ isn’t a panacea, either.

This was also echoed in another recent article on ‘Pharmaceutical Marketing in The New Normal’, published in the Forbes magazine on August 11, 2021. It wrote, ‘even the best, most advanced digital tools won’t help if reps are not properly trained.’ This is due to multiple factors. Let me elaborate the point from a new product launch perspective.

New normal brings unprecedented changes – no footsteps to follow:

The extent and depth of personalization required in any effective customer engagement process for successful outcomes, has undergone a fundamental shift. Today, personalization of content, channels and platforms is a necessity and no longer an option. In the new normal one size doesn’t fit all. Consequently, sales force training process, particularly for a new drug launch, has also become personalized, with simulation of new expectations and requirements of each market becoming a key ingredient, more than ever before.

Simulated sales training still not too common in pharma:

That personalized and simulated sales force training is still not too common in the pharma industry, was also captured in the February 2020 ‘The Voice of the Sales Rep study’ of the sales research firm – SalesFuel. It reported, just 30% of sales reps in the pharma industry are now getting personalized sales training based on individual needs. This study was done in the United States, and the same percentage is expected to be much less in India.

In this context, the above Forbes article also noted that at an elementary level, reps should be proficient in video conferencing and virtual CME basics, such as, screen sharing, lighting, cameras, and the likes. There could also be occasions when they may need to teach even some of the physicians for whom, as well, this type of engagement is new. Thus, simulation training may possibly play a critical role to make the sales force future ready, always.

Besides, gaining deeper insights of customers, market dynamics, and tailoring the content of personalized engagement, accordingly, will be a critical part of personalized training through simulation, especially for new product launch in the new normal.  

Doctors availing product and treatment related online services: 

While navigating through acute disruption of life during Covid pandemic, several doctors have learnt to use digital channels and platforms to avail product or new therapy related information directly, instead of through sales reps. And that too, as they want, when they want and the way they want, gaining a discretionary choice. Several surveys, such as,  2020 Accenture research, also reported many doctors want either virtual or a mix of virtual and in-person meetings with pharmaceutical reps, even after the pandemic ends.

Available studies also give a sense that the future overall trend in pharma is unlikely to be a replication of pre-Covid time, prompting the players to reimagine their customer engagement format. For example, a contemporary ‘Real Time Covid-19 Barometer Survey of physicians,’ by Sermo, found that ‘67% believe pharmaceutical companies could improve communications with HCPs and could do more to help physicians make prescribing decisions.’

Hence, even with the much-reduced threat from Covid infection, as and when it will happen, the same trend is likely to change the scope and traditional toolkit for future new brand launch, as well. Hence, pharma companies would, need to change their sales training architecture, accordingly – like simulation training – always keeping one ear on the ground.

Proven edge of simulation training in healthcare during Covid-19:

There are several studies in this area in different parts of the world. To illustrate the point, let me quote a Canadian study, published by ResearchGate in December 2020. It made several important points, which I summarized, as below.

The study elucidates, healthcare resources were strained to previously unforeseeable limits because of COVID-19 pandemic, in most countries. The unprecedented nature of disruption in health systems prompted the emergence of rapid simulation training for critical just-in-time COVID-19 education. The aim was to improve preparedness for giving high quality care to rapidly increasing number of Covid infected patients, including caregivers, across all healthcare sectors.

The researchers found that simulation training was pivotal for healthcare provider learning, alongside new systems integration, development of new processes, workflows, checklists, protocols, and in the delivery of quality clinical care to all concerned.

To cope with the new reality, triggered by the Covid pandemic, as also demonstrated by several other studies, simulation training has the potential to deliver the best learning outcomes. Some may obviously would seek a little more clarity in understanding what exactly is a simulation training that I am referring to.

What exactly is simulation training?

It won’t be terribly difficult for pharma marketers to understand what exactly simulation training in pharma sales and marketing is. As the name suggests, simulation is a replication of what happens or may happen in a real-life situation. In this particular case, it involves the simulation of changing pharma customers and market behavior and expectations, in the new normal.

Thus, a simulation training process, say for a new brand launch, would create virtual market scenarios by replicating all recent changes in customer behavior/expectations and the market dynamics – of a specific territory. This is usually done with AI based computer software, designed to help sales force learning of a real-life situation, without being in the thick of it on the ground. In simulated training, the selected trainees interact with technology, rather than reading notes or listening through the lectures of persons having similar insights.

The selling simulators are cost-effective and provides better outcomes:

Besides being cost-effective, simulation training is also considered a 24-carat way of developing new skills, and also assessing how well the trainees are translating the new learnings into practice. No wonder why even the US National Library of Medicine, after evaluation and review of several research studies, has acknowledged that simulation training imparts learning ‘just like a real thing.’

How will it work on the new product launch?

In pharma sales and marketing area, the simulation of customers’ post-pandemic new needs and expectations, can be simulated by developing a ‘selling simulator’ for new product launch, in the new normal. These simulators will integrate AI-based software with game dynamics or gamification, creating a virtual field situation for sales reps to continuously learn and hone their new-product launch skills. The required contemporary skills may often be unique in nature, beyond the traditional pathways, even where there are no footsteps to follow.

Why simulation training for a new drug launch will add greater value?

This  query is also well deliberated in the McKinsey & Company article - ‘Reshaping pharma’s strategy in the next normal,’ published on December 15, 2020, with the Covid pandemic as the backdrop. It underscores, ‘it is clear that major shifts in the way that healthcare professionals (HCPs) interact with pharma companies will present a challenge for the traditional launch model, with its reliance on face-to-face meetings with physicians and its “one size fits all” approach to engagement.’

The study further points out that “the traditional pharma commercial model will likely struggle to adapt to a different world. When reps venture back into the field, they will need to address the plurality and access challenges of the new interaction landscape. To do that, they will need to consider a new approach to launches: one that is digital, local, and personalized.”

This changing need will call for a new genre of training, and I think, simulation training for pharma reps will prove to be more productive in this area.

Conclusion:

Many uncertainties in the pharma business continue, even after the second wave of Covid pandemic, with the Damocles sword of its third wave hanging over the head, including the Indian population. In the current volatile pharma business environment, as an article on the subject, published by the Pharmaceutical Executive on July 30, 2021, articulates – the challenges of remote work mean that training approaches must be adaptable and engaging.

Simulation training, with its power to engage learners, and developed for strategically minded, and data-literate sales teams, would become a key component of the future pharmaceutical sales training landscape. This is destined to happen regardless of whether delivered on site or in remote training formats. From this perspective, I reckon, with a well thought-out – AI-driven selling simulator, especially for new product launch, to start with, could be a potential game changer in yet mostly untried new normal.

By: Tapan J. Ray  

Disclaimer: The views/opinions expressed in this article are entirely my own, written in my individual and personal capacity. I do not represent any other person or organization for this opinion.

Why Pharma Need To Connect Better With Patient Organizations Now?

A good number of patients (63%), especially those with chronic ailments would look for Patient Support Services, revealed a survey by Human Healthcare Systems, released on February 25, 2020. Alongside, drug companies are also, reportedly, investing billions of dollars in every year, for several types of patient support programs, according to the Fierce Pharma article of July 06, 2021, on this subject. It emphasized: ‘Pharma companies spend more than $5 billion on patient support programs every year.’

Thus, it will be interesting to explore – when patients are looking for Patient Support Services (PSPs) and pharma companies are also trying to deliver the same, what’s really happening on the ground? Today’s article will focus on this area to help pharma marketers to get a ringside view of this area, and take necessary action in this area to make this investment more productive.

The aim is to help create a cutting-edge marketing strategy, while delivering best patient value and outcomes in the new normal. Let me start by recapitulating what exactly is a PSP to ensure that we all are on the same page, during this discussion.

Patient Support Services (PSPs):

According to IQVIA, a key challenge in deliberating with PSPs is that they have broad definitions, and consequently, may often give rise to multiple interpretations, misunderstandings and even bias. Be that as it may, IQVIA defines PSP as ‘An umbrella term to describe initiatives led by pharmaceutical companies to improve access, usage, and adherence to prescription drugs. These programs can have a financial component, support clinical investments, focus purely on education, or a combination.’

As we also see around, such programs include – disease awareness campaigns, helping patients use their drugs at the right dose for the right duration for best outcomes, to help patients use their drugs with disease education, financial support and more.

Relevance of PSP in the new normal:

Although PSPs aren’t a new concept, studies unfold – value that PSPs deliver to the community is so significant that when created with a clear understanding of motivators and drivers of patient behavior, can fetch equally significant return on investments for the pharma players.

A recent IQVIA White Paper concludes by noting: ‘One of the major trends seen from the COVID-19 global pandemic, is an increase telehealth. As the point of enrolment into a patient support program goes digital, PSP programs need to adjust.’ This seismic shift in the way we seek and receive treatment will require companies to revisit and potentially update their actionable insight in this space, The paper further notes: ‘With an increase in digital enrolment there are now more opportunities to capture data points and utilize technology.’

Thus, I reckon, it will be worthwhile to fathom, when patients are looking for health care support services and pharma companies are also spending considerably towards the same, what exactly is happening on the ground.

Interestingly, according to the 2021 findings of Phreesia Life Sciences, which surveyed nearly 5,000 patients checking in for doctors’ appointments during the past February and March, found, ‘just 3% were using patient support programs (PSPs).’

Some key highlights of the survey findings:

The support programs in the above survey of Phreesia Life Sciences, broadly includes, services, such as, financial assistance, disease education and specifics about medicine – offered by pharma companies. Based on these, some of the key findings of the study were as follows: 

  • Just 3% of eligible patients are currently using support programs, and 8% have used them in their lifetimes.
  • 59% of patients have little to no knowledge of patient support programs.
  • 61% of patients feel that patient support programs of pharma companies would be “somewhat,” “a little,” or “not at all helpful” for them.
  • Most patients who had used support programs, used them either at first diagnosis, or when starting medication.
  • Only 10% of patients said they had learned about support programs online, but 44% said they’d like to learn about support programs online

Further, as one of the senior officials involved in this research, reportedly, said, ‘nine out of 10 qualified patients were not using the brand’s copay card—even though more than half (53%) said they would likely use one if they had it.’ Moreover, ‘two out of three patients reported it was the first time they were learning about it.’

Likely reasons for low usage of pharma’s PSPs: 

Some of the most likely reasons for low usage of pharma’s PSPs were deliberated in another article of Fierce Pharma dated December 04, 2020. A domain expert commented there, ‘pharma companies simply have missed the mark in developing useful, durable tools for patients. Elaborating this point further, she said, ‘Focusing just on specific adherence tasks, like medication reminders, isn’t providing enough value for patients over a long period of time.’

Another contributing factor could be, patients suffering from multiple diseases and those who are on multiple medications of different pharma companies, are unlikely to download four different apps to track each one.

One more reason could well depend on patients’ generally preferred sources to avail such services, which may not necessarily be pharma companies.

Patients generally preferred sources for patient services:

This point was discussed in the Accenture study – ‘Uniting pharma companies and patient organizations,’ published on August 07, 2019. This survey was done on 4000 patients and some broad findings of this study include the following:

  • Patients generally prefer services from patient organizations over those from pharma companies.
  • Patients feel that patient organizations have a better understanding of their emotional, financial, and other needs than many pharma companies.
  • Patients also want pharma companies to coordinate with patient organizations to provide better care.

The survey also captured details of patient preferences regarding availing required services from patient organizations, rather than the drug companies, as below:

  • Over 50% of patients have greater trust in and better experiences with patient organizations.
  • 64% of patients are willing to share their health data with patient organizations to get better care.
  • 52% of patients are willing to share their health data with patient organizations to get better care.
  • 72% of surveyed patients call or talk to someone at patient organizations on the phone.
  • 58% of patients attend in-person events hosted by patient organizations.

Are PSPs commercially useful to pharma companies?

The very fact that drug companies are currently spending over $5 Billion annually for PSPs, reflects their direct and indirect influence in pharma’s branding strategy and image building process. Otherwise, why would they spend so much? That said, the above survey details send a clear message to pharma marketers to maximize their marketing investments on PSPs, more than ever before. Consequently, the question arises, how to achieve that goal? 

Maximize marketing investments on PSPs:

Echoing and paraphrasing some points from the above IQVIA White Paper, let me highlight, especially for the marketers, 3 clear steps for maximizing returns from pharma’s investments on PSPs, as follows:

A. Gain beforehand deeper insights of patients’ PSP need and expectations: 

37% of patients surveyed said, pharma companies with actionable insights, will better understand their needs through collaboration with Patient Organizations (PO), leading to meaningful engagement in a more personalized way and more frequently.

B. Deliver patient expected value thorough close coordination with the POs:

This is because, 84% of patients think pharma companies – with closer coordination with, at least, a couple of influential patient groups or organizations (PO), will deliver greater value. This will also create a seamless and more cohesive patient experience, while filling gaps in the patient treatment process, to enhance end-to-end customer experience - in an unbiased way.

C.  Creating and delivering new and seamless patient experiences:

The newness is important – not just to delight the patients, but also for strategic differentiation in this ball game. This is possible by working closely with Patient Support Groups (PSGs) as partners, seeking ways to rethink for creating and delivering a unique patient experience from patients’ perspective, and outcome first basis.

Use of data, analytics and insights will be essential while creating care experiences that will better meet the patients’ needs, and would also help measure the impact of PSPs on an ongoing basis.

PSGs are helping to transform health care also in India:

Some PSGs are helping to transform healthcare with prudent use of PSPs in India, as they raise awareness about diseases, help people recover psychologically, and more, have been captured by Indian media, as well. One such report titled, How patient support groups are revolutionizing health care’ says: ‘Because of these networks, patients and their families have become better organized, and are equipped to handle emergency situations and advocate for access to treatment.’

Conclusion:

Echoing the ZS article, published on August 17, 2020, I too concur that COVID-19 has pushed the drug companies to define new ways to deliver care and reach patients. It is quite possible that patient organizations are moving faster in this direction than many pharma companies. Which is why, more patients, reportedly, prefer PSPs from patient organizations, over those from pharma companies.

Further, a course-correction in PSP, would also offer pharma marketers an additional opportunity. Because, PSPs have hidden potential to create an exceptional patient support base that marry brand’s key attributes with the new reality of patients, living with their conditions in the new normal.

Pharma companies will, therefore, need to move from typical reactive support programs – to delivering proactive patient experiences in a post-COVID-19 world, in partnership with PSGs. To ensure maximum number of patients use PSPs, it’s critical for pharma marketers to redefine – the “new normal” patient journey, and meet their current unmet needs in this space. That’s why, I reckon, to succeed in this ball game, pharma would need to effectively connect with patient organizations, more than ever before.

By: Tapan J. Ray  

Disclaimer: The views/opinions expressed in this article are entirely my own, written in my individual and personal capacity. I do not represent any other person or organization for this opinion.

Rebalance KOL-Mix As Covid-19 Redefines Pharma Marketing

‘It’s safe to say that 2020 was a year like no other and that 2021 will certainly not revert back to the old normal,’ reiterated the Harvard Business Review Article - ‘10 Truths About Marketing After the Pandemic,’ of March 10, 2021. Amid Covid 2.0, several astute pharma marketers, I reckon, have also realized the same by now. The recent Government announcement on the impending third wave of Covid-19, coupled with slow vaccination pace in the country, further strengthens this possibility.

That said, making all internalize that pharma marketing, and specifically the brand building process will no longer remain – as it traditionally was, may still be a tough task. Mere digitalization of the traditional marketing processes won’t be a magic wand, either, to excel in the rapidly transforming market situation. The task ahead is fundamentally cerebral – ahead of any Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools and applications.

With the market dynamics going through a metamorphosis, pharma marketing needs to be redefined. Capturing the nuances of this redefinition is essential also to ensure the right focus on the right Key Opinion Leaders (KOLs) – for successful branding with long-term image building. Today’s article will focus on this less charted area during the pandemic. Let me begin with a few examples of the redefined areas of marketing triggered by disruptive changes in the current pharma business environment.

Traditional pharma marketing axioms need to be redefined:

To give a flavor of this redefinition, I shall pick up the following two examples from the above Harvard Business Review Article and then zero-in on just one, to explore the recasting and rebalancing need of the KOLs, for business excellence in the new normal:

A.  Technology and human enablement:

Pre-pandemic belief: The right tech stack to drive modern marketing success.

Post-pandemic need: The right balance of factors (including tech stack) to drive modern marketing success.

In pre-pandemic days, focus on “tech stack” was emerging as an end-all game changer for marketing. But in the pandemic days there emerges a need to take a step back. The right approach to human enablement is becoming the key to properly understand the changes and their implications in the pharma business environment. Human enablement includes, making sure that people have the right skills to select and employ the most appropriate environment specific technology tools, effectively. The system should also ensure that the right measurement approaches are in place to motivate innovation and rewarding success.

B.  Relationship building to drive marketing success

Pre-pandemic belief: Relationships matter to drive marketing success

Post-pandemic need: Relationship building is everything to drive modern marketing success

Building relationship with customers rests on the bedrock of trust. Covid-19 has placed a new emphasis on relationships, faced with a near virtual sales environment. New findings indicate, the teams with existing relationships have been able to maintain revenue momentum, capitalizing on the strength of their prior bonds. In contrast, prospecting for new customers has required an evolved set of skills focused on selling solutions, not products, as the Harvard Business Review Article emphasized.

Trust, credibility, and integrity are fundamental to driving market momentum. These are foundational to the value exchange between a company and a consumer. As the Harvard paper writes, this has necessitated ‘a serious recasting of talent to identify people best suited to driving relationships in this new world of online interactions — a world that relies less on charm (and even an expense account) and more on insights and solutions. Trust will be built by and rewarded to those that listen to customer needs and then craft solutions to meet those needs.’

Thus, I believe, in the redefined pharma market, the marketers need to have a fresh look with fresh a pair of eyes to expand and select their KOLs to achieve their business goals – consistently, in the years ahead.

Pandemic impacted pharma’s KOL outreach:

Pharma marketers are well-aware how much they rely on their KOLs in several areas of a brand building strategy, including the creation of widely acknowledged brand reputation, winning key stakeholder trust on brands.  Thus, a robust strategy for engaging with stakeholders – based on KOL inputs, continue to remain an area of paramount importance for drug companies.

From this perspective, as I wrote before, during the early days of national lockdown triggered by Covid-19 pandemic, many marketers felt that in-person KOL outreach activities in physical events have only got disrupted temporarily. As the disruption prolonged, some companies hurriedly shifted online. Others hopefully kept waiting for some more time, and then tried to figure out how to catch up quickly by switching over to a more effective, interactive – and situation-specific contemporary communication channels and platforms, for them.

Marketers require recasting their KOL outreach strategy:

No doubt, KOL engagement remains a high priority area for pharma marketers - for guidance with fresh inputs while charting a new marketing pathway, mainly based on their:

  • Therapy area expertise where the company represents, and the sphere of influence
  • The span of influence to further business progress, gaining stakeholder trust and building brand reputation.

As the market environment and stakeholder expectations have altered significantly, in several marketing related areas, pharma marketers require quickly recasting their KOL outreach strategy, including virtual communication models and platforms. Many may consider, for valid reasons, though, that virtual events may not be as effective as effective as F2F physical events.

Notably, some well-researched digital outreach strategy for the KOLs – tailor-made according to their new expectations in the changing market dynamics, are trying to fetch the best out of them. The new initiative is also improving the effectiveness of virtual interactions manifold, steadily – with the ongoing honing of the processes. However, this would involve fresh mapping, and identification of a contemporary set of KOLs, soon, with in-depth understanding of their needs and interests.

Pharma KOL-mix need to include ‘influencers’ also:

Just to recap, KOLs are experts in their respective fields. Each one of them is also a well-regarded and influential voice, whose expert advice is respected and followed by many others – related to that field. These may include authorities in the same industry, whose opinion or decisions may have significant influence or impact on the business. In that sense, KOLs play the role of influencers, too.

Traditionally, in the drug industry KOLs are selected from accomplished and well-decorated medical experts who are often early adopters of new brands, playing a significant role in the prescription decision of other doctors.

Leveraging two other key roles of KOLs in the changing environment: 

The other two roles that need to be leveraged by pharma companies in the in the changing environment may include:

  • Making more people aware of the critical roles of pharma brands, e.g., what people have witnessed recently with Covid-19 drugs and vaccines.
  • Improving brand credibility and corporate reputation by gaining stakeholder trust. This is usually triggered a favorable word-of-mouth awareness of the role that the company is playing to save and improve the quality of human lives – and, in that process, the livelihoods.

This gets reflected in the most recent annual Axious Harris 100 survey, where two widely publicized Covid-19 vaccine makers – ‘Moderna and Pfizer leaped into the top 10 best-regarded companies in the U.S,’ among all other industries. This clearly highlights ‘Americans love their vaccine makers’. As reported, Moderna ranked third, while Pfizer featured at No. 7 on the strength of its product and innovation scores, nabbing high marks for vision and culture along the way.

‘They’re the first biopharma companies to crack the top 10 in the ranking’s 20-year history.’ Interestingly, Johnson & Johnson, which featured in the top 10 before; this year, it ranks 72 on the list with a reputation score roughly the same as 2020’s,’ the report adds.

KOL outreach needs to be more focused and well-targeted on even niches: 

This is an important need and has been vindicated by Deloitte focus group studies in the U.S., India, South Africa and the U.K and published on May 06, 2021. The studies found that the pandemic did improve overall pharma reputation score with a ‘reason to hope for more.’

However, still many respondents used phrases like, “profit-making” and “harmful”, as reasons of why they don’t trust pharma. Curiously, in the U.S., 29% of people cited “questionable moral integrity of biopharma executives” as a problem. Only about one-fourth (26%) of participants agreed that their trust in drug makers increased during the pandemic, even when Deloitte mentioned vaccine development.

Conclusion:

To mitigate such reputation, trust, and credibility related issues, besides transparency in drug pricing, besides efficacy and safety related research-data, pharma needs to work closely with a wider span of KOLs, who may help in explaining complex science in simpler words.

As the above Deloitte studies bring to the fore, the pandemic could be yet another fresh starting point for pharma to gain long-term trust of customers, and other stakeholders. In that endeavor, a fresh set of KOLs need to be identified through well-structured mapping. This initiative should ideally include, besides top medical and regulatory experts of high repute, globally acknowledged academics, top domain experts, and key members of the government.

Thus, in my view, as the pandemic redefines pharma marketing, there is an important need of rebalancing the KOL-mix of each company, based on their specific needs, especially in the virtual space, as the situation will unfold.

By: Tapan J. Ray     

Disclaimer: The views/opinions expressed in this article are entirely my own, written in my individual and personal capacity. I do not represent any other person or organization for this opinion.

 

Creating A Unique Patient Experience By Listening To Patients Voice – An Imperative In The New Normal

Acquiring deeper insight on the patient journey through a disease treatment process to create and enhance end-to-end patient experience, never assumed such critical importance, ever in the past. Without this realization, I reckon, even digitalization of any scale in the pharmaceutical industry, is unlikely to yield desired results. The term ‘Patient experience’ is generally considered as ‘the summation of interactions that influence patient perceptions across the continuum of care, until now,’ as defined in an article, published by Aranca on February 28, 2020.

This isn’t a new concept. This subject was well-deliberated even before the pandemic crisis. For example, an article, published in the Pharma Voice on April 2014, had also highlighted this point. It wrote: “Too many companies continue to view the world as a physician-centric, and do not recognize the growing influence of the patient in treatment decisions. The evolution toward a fully integrated commercialization approach centering on the patient experience will continue to crystallize over the next five to 10 years. Within a few years the industry will universally have one goal that supports the patient experience, as there is a tremendous amount of attention being put on the patient today.”

Even thereafter, another paper, published in the Reuters Event Pharma, on August 17, 2017, also reiterated: ‘A greater understanding of the patient journey is rapidly becoming an essential tool for market access.’ It further elaborated that the use of patient journey data stands to benefit everyone:

  • Patients: through empowerment programs,
  • Pharma marketers and more widely, the Company: by targeting the right patient segment and the company more widely.

The paper concluded: ‘Given the potential benefits, pharmaceutical companies should develop a robust mechanism to design effective patient journeys, which could prove instrumental when it comes to bridging treatment gaps and improving quality of life for countless patients around the world.’

From this perspective, Covid-19 pandemic seems to have hastened the process with changing customer behavior and expectations in the new normal, thorough understanding of customer needs emerged as a key success requirement for pharma marketers. That said, customer experience has to be measured both qualitatively and quantitively through credible market research initiatives, capturing the patients’ views. Guessing the same, as was generally the common practice in the old normal, would no longer suffice. This article will dwell in this area.

The pandemic played a catalytic role:

That Covid-19 pandemic played a catalytic role to hasten the process of providing a unique patient experience during a patient’s journey through a disease treatment process in the digital world. This was vindicated by a ZS study, published on July 05, 2020. The analysis found – over the last three months several companies started looking at new ways to engage with patients. These include:

  • Forming patient panels – to continually check and monitor the quality of patient experience that the company is providing,
  • Connecting with patient advocacy groups – to get a pulse on critical needs
  • Leveraging the field force – to hear from physicians where their patients need the most help.

These are laudable initiatives for dovetailing patients’ views in the drug marketing strategy to provide a unique experience to patients during their end-end-to journey through a disease treatment process.

Measuring patient-experience – an integral part of digital sales and marketing:

Measuring patient-experience has always been an integral part, virtually of all types of sales and marketing using digital platforms. We experience it almost every day, such as, while buying a product through Amazon, buying grocery items through D-Mart, scheduling a doctor appointment through Practo, buying medicines through PharmaEasy, or even for availing a service through Urban Company.

The November 15, 2020 research report of DT Consulting has also reiterated this need. It found, patients seeking and receiving care, depend on a complex system of health providers—an environment in which pharmaceutical companies play an important role. ‘When seeking care, patients gravitate to experiences that other patients rated well; when receiving care, they prefer experiences that consistently meet or exceed their expectations,’ it underscored.

Why then all pharma digital initiatives for its customers aren’t in sync with such practices? It’s about time that pharma players also follow a similar path, to continually improve company offerings, based on what the customers expect from a company’s brand and services – regardless of whether they are doctors, patients or any other key stakeholder.

I re-emphasize, this initiative has to cover end-to-end of a customer journey starting from clinical development, brand launch and expansion of market access. In each of these stages, loose knots, if any, require to be tightened, after thorough deliberations, to delight the customers – and consequently rewarded by them, appropriately. While some progress can be seen in this area, pan industry progress in this space, still falls much short of other industries. A pharma company may continue to ignore its importance, even in the new normal, at its own peril.

The way forward won’t be a bed of roses, expect thorns to overcome:

The above ZS study also brought out some interesting facts, as follows:

  • 43% of participants cited difficulty identifying quantitative, measurable KPIs that fit within the organizational structure and practices,
  • 29% indicated a lack of tools and resources to help communicate tangible outcomes and the case for change
  • 22% cited organizational silos as the true barriers.

The good news is, as the study highlights, Covid-19 has proven that it’s quite possible to actually be more patient centric to create an exclusive brand experience for patients. But, many ‘organizations still have work to do, in getting there.’

Sermonizing what patients’ need, without involving them, may be counterproductive:

Things were quite different in predominantly a physician-centric world for patients, in the old normal. At that time, sermonizing the treatment needs of patients, blended with a heavy dose of respective company’s self-serving interest, sans patient involvement in the treatment decision making processes – worked. The same approach may not yield desired cost-effective outcomes, when the customer behavior, triggered by the pandemic, is fast changing, for various reasons.

‘Patients want more services before they are treated’ for a disease: 

Many patients have been asking for more services, especially from the pharmaceutical companies, even before they undertake the journey of getting a disease well treated by medical professionals, regardless of disease types. Till Covid-pandemic, this remained mostly an unmet need for many patients, as this is an arduous for most pharma players. Which is why, most drug companies did not want to jettison the traditional approach, in favor of being ‘patient-centric.’ Thus, the entire decision-making process for any disease treatment continued to remain ‘doctor-centric.’

This wasn’t an unknown need for most patients, either, as it was well documented through several research studies. For example, an Accenture survey of 10,000 patients had examined their unmet needs in seven different therapeutic areas across the entire patient journey. Its findings concluded, ‘patients want more services before they are treated for a disease, regardless of disease type.’ Interestingly, even when such services were available in some places, the vast majority of patients still are not aware of the availability of these patient services, the paper added.

The situation is different today:

Overall, the situation is different today, mostly because, during a long Covid-19 lockdown period, many patients started visiting the cyberspace to manage their health, in increasing numbers. With the experience thus gained, a large population, even in India, now consider digital as a primary channel to initiate the journey for their disease treatment, such as telehealth.

As judicious assimilation of knowledge has always been a source of wisdom, patients have now become wiser to demand more services from a drug company that will help them to get cured of diseases and maintain good health – the way they want. More importantly, patients have also realized that in most cases treatment alternatives to choose from, are plenty.

Thus, the above study of Accenture raised the following question for the pharma companies to ponder that is more relevant today than ever before: ‘Are pharmaceutical companies missing a significant opportunity to provide services at the earliest possible point in the patient journey – before they are even being treated for a disease?’ That’s why, ‘patients deserve as much focus, if not more, in pharma market research as ‘physicians.’

‘Patients’ deserve as much focus on market research as ‘physicians’:

In the old normal, medical reps, in general, used to expect their target physicians to educate the patients about the disease while prescribing their respective company’s brands. With many patients getting more and more informed in the digital world, pharma companies need to strategize a comprehensive patient engagement and educational campaigns, enabling patients to actively participate in their treatment decision making process, exactly the way they want, to improve quality of life.

From this perspective, collecting first-hand data on patient-experience, straight from the voice of patients, isn’t too common a practice for the drug companies, even today. It will rather be a new venture for many, to gain meaningful insights on the impact of their operational endeavor – from the patients’ perspective. This will, in turn, help organizations strategize more productive engagements with them, reaping a rich harvest.

The process starts with ferreting out patients’ needs from a variety of credible sources – after cross-checking and getting it vetted by focus groups of patients, in due course. Some pharma majors, reportedly, invite patients to narrate their experience in the disease treatment process, directly to medical reps at their sales meeting on virtual platforms. A few others have started patient-groups in the selected therapy areas, for the same purpose.

Nonetheless, pharma marketers to please ensure that their organizations need to genuinely care about the patients, making this onerous task deliver a win-win outcome for both. The key point to take note of is that its real purpose, in no way, should be achieving any company’s self-serving objectives, under this creative façade.

Conclusion:

Creating and enhancing the unique customer experience has been recognized as one of the key success factors in any industry, pharma business is no exception. Curiously, it could not draw as much focus as it should have been, until Covid-pandemic struck, triggering disruptive changes in the customer behavior and the overall commercial environment. The good news is, in tandem with their digital transformation process, several drug majors are now mulling about patient experience-driven marketing strategies.

For this purpose, the pre-requirement is to put in place a comprehensive patient experience measurement framework, to accurately understand the end-to-end journey of the patients in their disease treat processes. This would include, capturing their key unmet needs from various sources, including focus group studies of real patients, in various formats.

Prudent use of connected health applications and AI platforms may be of great help – supported by state-of-the-art analytics, to gain meaningful access to patients’ behavioral and attitudinal data for strategic use, in various digital platforms. This has the potential to deliver a quantum leap in business outcomes. From this perspective, I reckon, for creating a unique patient experience, listening to patient voice, is an imperative in the new normal.

By: Tapan J. Ray  

Disclaimer: The views/opinions expressed in this article are entirely my own, written in my individual and personal capacity. I do not represent any other person or organization for this opinion.