What Have And Haven’t Changed In Pharma’s New Normal?

Posted on September 26, 2021 by Tapan Ray

While navigating through the challenge of disruptive changes, several pharma marketers are now focusing more on creating, connecting, and leveraging all market and customer related data, across the organization. Astute ones are using state-of-the-art tools, platforms, and techniques to gain actionable insights on new demands of pharma markets. I wrote about it in my article - ‘Data: the new ‘Magic Wand’ For Pharma Business Excellence,’ published in this blog on October 01, 2018.

This process is helping them to fathom what areas the pandemic has changed and what it hasn’t. Their aim is to draw cutting-edge strategies accordingly for market effectiveness – outperforming competition. This article will explore that space with contemporary examples. Let me start with a few illustrations of some hits and misses for the treatment of Covid – as the world started learning to live with this menacing virus. This was enviable, as the requisite scientific date wasn’t readily available at that moment of truth. But the time has changed now.

Some hits and misses:

As the pandemic overwhelmed the world, and no well-documented treatment for infection caused by the brand new virus – Covid-19 was available, many drug players were given quick emergency approval by country regulators for some repurposed drugs. But most of those weren’t found effective as fresh clinical data started pouring in. For example, the World Health Organization (WHO), have, reportedly, indicated that remdesivir, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir and interferon regimens appeared to have little or no effect on 28-day mortality or the in-hospital course of COVID-19 among hospitalized patients.

More recently, Gilead Sciences Veklury – a failed Ebola drug, repurposed for hospitalized Covid-19 patients, suddenly became a blockbuster drug, according to a September 17, 2021 report. However, in less than a year, alongside more research data - a study from Europe, published in The Lancet Infectious Diseases, showed that Veklury has no real benefit. The report also highlights: ‘Aided by a ringing endorsement from then-president Donald Trump, Veklury rang up sales of $2.8 billion in 2020, including $1.9 billion in the final quarter. But those sales slid this year to $1.5 billion in the first quarter followed by $829 million in the second quarter.’

Similarly, there are several areas that are seemingly getting transformed, triggered by the pandemic and the time for resorting to a hit or miss approach, is now virtually over. From pharma marketers’ point of interest, it will now be at one’s own peril for not challenging the pre-Covid business traditions, rules, and well-tried strategies on customer relationships and brand building models. This brings us to the question on what specifically have changed in the new normal as the pharma industry navigates thorough the Covid pandemic – for close to two years now.

Pandemic-triggered changes in the pharma marketing area:

Changes are many and are being studied across the world. One such recent analysis, articulating how the pandemic triggered changes have redefined marketing, was published by the Harvard Business Review (HBR), on March 10, 2021. This paper came more than a year after the pandemic overwhelmed the world. This article listed some interesting macro-level changes, including the following:

Old normal: You are competing with your competitors.
New normal: You are competing with the last best experience your customer had.

Old normal: Customers hope you have what they want.
New normall: Customers expect you to have exactly what they want.

Old normal: Courting customers is just like dating.
New normal: Courting customers is just like online dating.

Old normal: Customers must sit at the heart of your marketing strategy.
New normal: Customers must sit at the heart of your customer journey.

Old normal: Agility is a technology process.
New normal: Agility is a modern marketing approach.

Old normal: Your brand should stand behind great products.
New normal: Your brand should stand behind great values.

To illustrate the point, let me now give a few examples of some micro-level changes in the same space.

Some transformation trends:

I am citing a few examples related to pharma’s traditional sales and marketing models. One such area is, quite a few companies are adopting connected data based and analytics-supported Omnichannel approach for customer engagement. The key objective is to deliver coherent and high-quality customer experience.

The need for new commercial models for the changing life sciences market, was also highlighted in an interesting article, published in the Pharmaceutical Executive on September 16, 2021. The authors identified six health care macro trends, demonstrating the value of transforming care delivery and shifting market behavior that prompt to reframe customer value propositions.

Taking a cue from this paper, I am listing below some of the current trends – as I see these and wrote before in this blog. Each one of these calls for well-connected data with analytics support:

Staying relevant to customers with a focus on customer experience.

‘Made to measure’ marketing for personalized care, as “one-size-fits-all” care regimens losing its relevance.

Fostering a new genre of ‘customer-brand relationship’ to drive more targeted go‑to‑market strategies, enhanced agility/mobility of resources and highly personalized customer interactions.

Augmenting pharma customers’ new value expectations for competitive advantages, besides dynamic forecasting, sales force performance analytics support and predictive pricing modeling.

Arriving at right and flexible customer value delivery models, as the health care sector shifts toward new sites of care – outside the traditional old normal models. For example, with more patients preferring Telehealth pharma marketing needs retooling to reap a rich harvest.

Meeting the growing demand for value‑based care with novel risk‑adjusted and outcome‑based Price-Value-Models, supported by ongoing innovation in this area and sophisticated approach to value, affordability and outcomes.

Interestingly, despite Herculean constraints, many pharma players continued creating and delivering value, as the customers were expecting with changing situations.

Drug-price sensitivity is increasing:

In the new normal, drug price sensitivity of customers is increasing manifold, for various reasons. A June 18, 2020 study, flags: ‘Nine in 10 Concerned About Rising Drug Costs Due to COVID-19.’ Although, this particular study (Gallup Poll) was conducted in the United States, general public apprehension is no different in other parts of the world, including India.

In my article of September 14, 2020, I also wrote that the concept of ‘fair pricing a drug’ is being deliberated by many experts around the world, since quite some time, till today. But it continues. Most recently, as reported on September 22, 2021, for different reasons related to its new Alzheimer’s drug - Aduhelm, including its hefty price tag of $56,000 annually per patient, ‘Biogen reps banned from D.C.-area neurology clinics.’

Regardless of such customer reactions, the pharma industry, as reported on September 17, 2021, continues to advocate – drug pricing pressure will stifle innovation, blocking patient access to needed medicines and dry up investment in important R&D on new therapies. Curiously, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), is spending more than $1 million on TV ads as part of a massive lobbying and communications campaign emphasizing the potential harm to patients seeking cures for deadly diseases, as the report highlights.

Innovation – remained mostly unhindered from old to new normal:

Customers’ expectations can’t be ignored indefinitely. Interestingly, the world has also witnessed it with Covid drug and vaccine innovation continuing even during the most trying times during the pandemic, even in India. It is, therefore, quite understandable why unfettered access to drug innovation is considered an oxymoron, by many.

The good news is, despite shrill voices over pricing measures, the quest for adding meaningful value to the healthcare space continues unhindered. As reported on September 19, 2021, both Pfizer and Merck are advancing oral antiviral candidates targeting Covid-19 into late-stage testing. Thus, I reckon, regardless of jarring noise from pharma lobbyists, drug innovation, willy-nilly, has to satisfy the diverse demand of health care customers.

Innovation needs to satisfy demands of diverse healthcare customers:

That, increasingly, drug innovations will need to be based on their ability to satisfy the demands of life sciences companies’ diverse customer-perceived value-based, was also echoed by the Pharmaceutical Executive article of September 16, 2021.

While doing so, companies will need to structure innovation in terms of health outcomes, affordability, and personalization, as the paper emphasized. It further added, ‘broader definition of innovation means products are no longer the central driver of value.’ Instead, innovation will be powered by an increasingly diverse stream of data that resides outside the confines of the traditional health ecosystem.

Covid pandemic accelerated the transition of this process of innovation, drawing its new focus on providing a seamless and holistic customer experience in the disease treatment process – supported by advanced analytics and this deeper understanding of customer segments.

Conclusion:

Many pharma marketers have possibly undertaken a sophisticated and credible market scanning exercise in the new normal, to assess by themselves what have or haven’t changed in their customer preferences and market dynamics. If not, I would encourage them to initiate it, at least, now.

Equally noteworthy, as the above HBR article wrote, in the post pandemic period: ‘Beyond geography, marketing messages need to be personally relevant, aligned to an individual’s situation and values, as opposed to demographics, such as age and gender.’

The objective is to create a personal connection between the customer and the brand promotional content, aiming to influence the prescribing and purchasing behavior, based on their psychographic to attitudinal characteristics. This process would require creating and screening lots of customized data, supported by sophisticated analytics.

From the above perspective, I reckon, deep insight on what have or haven’t changed in the healthcare environment alongside its customers, would be of fundamental importance for pharma marketers, 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.

Augment Pharma Customers’ New Value Expectations With Content Marketing

Posted on May 31, 2021 by Tapan Ray

‘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.

The study observed, right from the early days of Covid-19 pandemic, daily operations of many health care providers (HCPs) shifted to more virtual interactions with both patients and pharma companies. The participating doctors also felt, the services that pharma companies are now offering deliver higher value than the pre-pandemic period.

Accenture’s follow-up study in August 2020 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.

For example, in the above August 2020 survey, most HCPs said pharma players are increasingly providing education on how to better treat patients remotely and help them manage their conditions in light of COVID-19. Besides, some of these companies are also helping patients understand various contemporary health and care related issues.

Against this backdrop, as the study underscored: ‘Now is the time for pharma companies to redefine their relevance.’ Picking up from here – in this article, I shall focus on the relevance of ‘Content Marketing’ in pharma to effectively deliver the new value expectations of physicians with a new value delivery model.

Pharma marketing can’t be ‘an outdated and uncoordinated analogue’ any longer:

Since quite some time, technological innovation has started opening new vistas of opportunities with new tools, multi-channels, and platforms for personalized and more effective customer engagement in pharma. But, majority of tradition-bound pharma players, unlike their counterparts in other industries, preferred to stick to the single channel marketing model, that has been offering golden eggs, till Covid-19 struck.

It’s not that no one in pharma knew at that time about the usefulness of content marketing. This is vindicated even in the article on the future of pharma marketing, published in the Pharmaphorum, on May 23, 2017. It wrote: ‘Where others have taken marketing innovation in their stride, pharma retains an outdated and uncoordinated analogue perspective of how to communicate its business.’

Citing examples of some pharma marketers, such as, Boehringer Ingelheim and Eli Lilly, it wrote, ‘while moves have been made to embrace new marketing methods, such as the integration of digital technologies for multichannel marketing (MCM) strategies, the way forward for pharma marketing is far from clear.’ It was – then.

It is different now;

Covid-19 pandemic has encouraged many pharma marketers to expand marketing focus much beyond just product information to meet their customers new value expectations. These encompass some critical areas, as the May and August 2020 surveys of Accenture have brought out.

For many companies, content marketing strategy with an omnichannel presence will help build long-term relationships with customers. That said, for all to be on the same page, let me recap – what exactly is content marketing, and its difference from the traditional single channel marketing in the pharma industry.

Content marketing in pharma:

According to the Content Marketing Institute: ‘Content marketing is a strategic marketing approach focused on creating and distributing valuable, relevant, and consistent content to attract and retain a clearly defined audience – and, ultimately, to drive profitable customer action.’

Instead of pitching the products or services, content marketing provides contemporary, relevant, and useful content to customers to help them solve their contemporary issues in the given space. Since quite some time, content marketing is being practiced in many industries, including -by a selected few in pharma, as indicated above.

The key difference from traditional marketing:

The value of content marketing lies in the quality of personalized engagement between the customer and the company with personalized content through different channels. From this perspective, while traditional marketing is akin to ‘shouts’ at the customers – generally, for a brand prescription, whereas content marketing is akin to ‘talking’ with them for a solution. Content marketing in pharma is, therefore, about a grand strategy for effective participation in meaningful conversations for development stronger stakeholder relationships.

Content marketing usually includes educational articles – on the company website or in the form of e-books, videos, infographics, white papers, magazines, podcasts, or webinars. The content for all these need to be tailor made to credibly answer specific questions that customers have and provide them with something they can’t get elsewhere. This process of creating a deeper and a sustainable bond with stakeholders, often pays a rich commercial dividend, even in trying times.

Increasing use of content marketing, especially, in a fast-changing scenario, as we witness today, can help a pharma company to change and enhance its customer’s behavior toward the company, in a win-win manner.

Some recent examples of content marketing in pharma:

For more clarity, let me give below a few examples of good content marketing in the pharma industry, as available in the cyberspace – some of them capturing Covid related issues too:

Speak Your Migraine, developed by Novartis, was created to support people living with migraine. The website carries an impact assessment tool for the visitors to feel how migraine affects people’s lives, enabling them to openly share their experiences with doctors and family.

Lilly Pad is Eli Lilly’s official blog, consisting of articles on the company, its research to cure diseases and improve the quality of lives. The blog also provides details of the health and public policy, along with corporate social responsibility of the organization in various areas of the society.

Takeda Pharmaceutical launched its campaign IBD Unmasked to support and create increased awareness of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The campaign aims to help IBD sufferers find their inner super-strength and become superheroes like the characters featured in the graphic novels within the campaign.

Bayer’s content marketing initiatives span across print and digital media with a large following. The organization publishes two well-appreciated publications as a carrier of its content: The Bayer Scientific Magazine and the Bayer Magazine.

Conclusion:

Overall, pharma and biotech industries don’t seem to be doing as well in this area. According to ‘The State of Content Survey for Life Sciences’ by Accenture, only very few of them think that they are doing well. For example:

Just 13% of pharma and biotech marketers and 17% of med tech marketers think they leverage content well.

Only 4% in med tech and 11% in pharma/biotech report they have a clearly documented content strategy that meets their current and future needs (compared to 42% across all industries).

Only 6% of med tech marketers and 9% of pharma/biotech marketers feel objectives are clearly laid out (versus 19% across all industries).

It is quite possible that more than a year since Covid disruptions, this situation has somewhat improved for some companies. Nevertheless, amid this complex environment, most of the pharma and biotech players still require defining a robust ‘content marketing strategy’ for them. Establishing clear objectives of the content strategy based on well-researched data, along with its measurement criteria, will demand a quality thought process. Depending on the strategic requirements, the leadership will need to put in place an organizational structure for content marketing, including people, processes, technology, and tools that can deliver the stated content marketing goals – both during, as well as after the pandemic period.

Thus, I reckon, to effectively augment pharma customers’ new value expectations, content marketing needs to occupy an important place in today’s pharma marketing playbook.

By: Tapan J. Ray

More Challenges For Brand Launch Success In The New Normal

Posted on February 8, 2021 by Tapan Ray

The drug manufacturers’ life blood to drive business growth has always been successful new product launch. However, this task has always remained a tough challenge to crack, since last so many years for various reasons. According to McKinsey & Company: “About two-thirds of drug launches don’t meet expectations. Improving that record requires pharmaceutical companies to recognize the world has changed and adjust their marketing accordingly.” Several research studies have been carried out by now to gain actionable insight on this issue.

Existing challenges for successful drug launch got further amplified, as Covid-19 pandemic added a novel dimension in this space. It involves disruptive changes in many facets of customers’ new product-value expectations. Similar changes are witnessed in the product value delivery process, doctor-patient engagement, content development and delivery platforms, among others. This article will explore this area from successful new product launch perspective, in the days ahead.

Dismal outcome of many new drug launches – more for primary care:

According to a recent study, published by L.E.K Consulting on December 18, 2020: ‘About half of all products launched over the past 15 years have underperformed pre-launch consensus forecasts by more than 20%.’ This is quite in line with what McKinsey & Company found in 2014, as quoted in the beginning of this article.

However, in a relative yardstick, the primary care market has been the most vulnerable, which continues even during the ongoing pandemic. For example, according to an April 2020 Evaluate Vantage analysis, ‘Covid-19 adds a new danger to drug launches.’ The study emphasized, new drug launches, especially those targeting the primary care market, are particularly vulnerable as the pandemic continues. The key reason being, besides widespread disruptions in the health care system, sales teams will be physically unable to reach frontline physicians, as much as, and also the way they could do the same in the old normal. The studies underscore that a strong launch is critical to achieving maximum commercial potential, despite odds.

Some pivotal factors demand a greater focus than ever before:

After in-depth analysis of various studies in this area, some pivotal marketing factors appeared critical to me, in order to reduce success uncertainty while launching new products.

Alongside, unbreachable and agile supply chain alternatives also assumed a never before-frontline-importance in the new normal, unlike pre-Covid days. Another recent study, titled ‘Competitiveness During Covid-19 Pandemic: New Product Development and Supply Chain Agility’, published by ResearchGate in October 2020, vindicated the point.

As the title indicates, the above study examined the effect of new product development and supply chain agility to gain competitiveness during the Covid-19 pandemic and probably beyond. Thus, while developing and launching new products in the new normal, some pivotal factors, such as the following, appeared critical to me, in order to reduce success-uncertainty while launching new products:

Early planning for launch with a robust market access strategy, better sales forecasting with stretch goals – supported by state-of-the art forecasting tools and relevant learnings from the past.

Gaining actionable insight on changing customer needs, market dynamics and competitive threats in the new normal – by generating credible and contemporary data and leveraging the power of analytics – to offer differentiated stakeholder value.

Driving home patient-centric coeval product values that will delight customers – through flawless execution of stakeholder engagement strategies.

Working out virtual, innovative, personalized and impactful alternatives to some critical launch related physical events, such as, conferences, seminars, webinars and the likes, for doctors and other customers.

Developing creative and contemporary content and other marketing assets for significant online or omnichannel presence of new brands – supported by video clips and other tools, aiming at the target audience.

Differentiating the launch product clearly from those of the nearest competitors, where a focus on price-value relationship of the brand – from the patients’ perspective, could play a game changing role. As McKinsey & Company also highlighted, launching an undifferentiated product in an unestablished disease area carries a greater risk of failure.

Creating a robust and agile supply chain to navigate through unexpected market changes – as all experienced recently.

Delivering ‘patient-centric’ real value of the brand together, is critical:

Interestingly, L.E.K Consulting has also emphasized in its recent study that to drive and effectively deliver ‘patient-centric’ real value of new products, it is imperative for drug companies to execute the launch process flawlessly.

To make it happen on the ground – at the moment of truth, careful selection of a team of self-motivated people is necessary. This needs to be followed by intense training in all aspects of the specific launch, including effective use of modern digital tools and platforms – and above all – by creating a ‘can do’ team spirit to deliver the deliverables.

This requirement has been epitomized in the recent article, titled ‘Beyond the Storm: Launch excellence in the new normal,’ published by McKinsey & Company. Therein, the authors articulated, ‘Intangible though it may sound, great launches have a different feel from normal launches. There is a real sense that – we’re all in this together.’

Pharma’s current way of using digital platforms doesn’t satisfy many doctors:

Over the last one year, as the pandemic brought all human activities virtually to a grinding halt, there has been a significant shift towards digital tools and online platforms, including in the way medical practitioners interact with drug companies. As recent surveys indicate, pharma customers don’t seem to be quite satisfied with the way many pharma players are currently making use of this technology.

This is happening even with those doctors who are open to virtual engagement and in favor of remote patient consultations. The issue needs to be resolved soon, particularly for new product launch successfully – using digital platforms, as reported in recent surveys.

The survey reports retraining of ‘sales reps to become digital orchestrators’:

One such recent survey, conducted by Indegene, which was also reported by Fierce Pharma on February 01, 2021, digital dissatisfaction of doctors with pharma companies, has jumped during the pandemic. The rates of dissatisfaction with pharma digital interactions, across media channels, ranged from 23% to almost 50% of physicians. Some of the key findings of the study include:

49% of physicians are not happy with pharma’s social media engagements – perceived as less sophisticated when compared to expectations set by consumer companies.

Pharma is far from providing a satisfactory digital experience, as compared to other industries. The current dissatisfaction level where a higher percentage of doctors were dissatisfied, include marketing emails – 46%, telephone sales calls with sales reps – 42% and both webinars and websites – each at 39%.

In-person meetings dropped from 78% to 15% during the pandemic, but even now only 48% of doctors surveyed expect in-person engagements to continue in the post-COVID world.

Attendance at medical conferences also dropped from 66% to only 16% during the shutdowns and travel restrictions, but only 50% of HCPs now expect to resume in-person congresses after it’s safe to hold them.

The number of physicians engaged in remote sales visits increased from 11% to 47% during the pandemic, probably because there weren’t other alternatives available. Interestingly, one-third of physicians still plan to continue with virtual sales meetings even after the pandemic.

Most stakeholders are realizing, this is going to be the new normal, with senior pharma leadership also saying, ‘it’s never going to be the same as before.’

About 5 of the top 15 global pharma players are retraining their sales reps to become “digital orchestrators” and working to help them create clear and comprehensive digital communications for doctors.

Speedy resolution of these issues is likely making a substantial difference in improving pharma-to-physician interactions, particularly during new drug launches, in the days ahead.

Conclusion:

Success uncertainties in new product launches have always been a cause of concern for the drug industry, especially after having invested a substantial resource towards innovation and clinical developments. Interestingly, pharma players were mostly following ‘stick to the knitting’ dogma, as it were, in their launch planning. Despite the availability of sophisticated digital tools and analytics over the last several years, particularly in generating and accurate analysis of contemporary and credible data to gain insights, not much had changed radically. Suddenly Covid pandemic disrupted most market traditions, business processes, and the general belief on decision makers’ ‘gut feelings’ on customer behavior, market dynamics. Besides, the mindset of ‘doing better that what you have been always doing’, prevailed in many cases. In India, market research for most companies remained within the ambit of syndicated retail and prescription audit, despite frequent grumbling of many marketers on some critical findings of these reports.

The last one year has created more challenges in this area, although with a silver lining. A large number of drug companies have now stepped into the area of digital marketing – in varying degree, scale and resource deployment. This shift is expected to help reduce launch success uncertainties of new drugs. It will again, depend on how effectively the technology is leveraged by the cerebral power of astute markers.

Another article on pharma product launch, published by McKinsey & Company on December 15, 2020, also vindicated this point. It underlined: ‘As pharmaceutical companies reshape their commercial model to prepare for the uncertainties ahead, personalization and digital enablement will be crucial to launch success in the new environment.’

Amid these, as some surveys highlight, many doctors are not satisfied with the way digital technology is being currently used by pharma companies – to interact with them and cater to their information needs. With these ‘teething troubles’ being properly and promptly addressed, many drug companies, I reckon, will be able to remarkably reduce success uncertainties of new drug launches 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.

Create Greater Patient–Value To Excel With Repurposed Covid Brands

Posted on November 23, 2020 by Tapan Ray

Regular introduction of new molecules, line extensions or a Novel Drug delivery System (NDDS) has remained the life blood for pharma to rejuvenate a company’s product portfolio for driving organizational growth. But, Covid’s unprecedented and devastating assault on human lives and livelihoods, has pushed many of these initiatives off track. Covid infection was declared pandemic by the World health organization (WHO) on March 11, 2020, compelling the industry to primarily focus on finding solutions for survival, especially in the product development areas.

As the fight against time, the need for survival became so intense, there was no time for pharma companies going back to primary research, to discover new effective Covid specific drug molecules. Vaccines – at the initial stage of the pandemic, were considered by experts could be the only ‘magic bullet’, to get the humanity back again on its feet, after a fierce knockout blow by the virus. As on date, although vaccines seem to be nearer the finishing line of creating adequate initial immunity against Covid, still there are no scientifically proven drugs to predictably cure this infection.

Meanwhile, the focus of all concerned is on the existing drugs, to examine their effectiveness against Covid-19. Accordingly, right from hydroxychloroquine, dexamethasone to a number of already existing antiviral agents were repurposed for Covid treatment, under emergency approval by country regulators, pending detailed clinical trials.

For various critical reasons, experts now feel that the use various NDDS technologies in repurposing existing drugs, would create greater value for patients in Covid treatment. At the same time, this will help pharma companies to create a cutting-edge differentiator for their repurposed brands – being more patient centric. In this article, I shall dwell in this area, starting with the current status and issues with repurposed Covid drugs, as of date.

Current status and issues with repurposed Covid drugs:

According to recent reports, such as one titled ‘Formulation and delivery strategies for COVId-19 drugs,’ published by the AIchE in June 2020, more than 40 different drugs are currently being explored for efficacy against COVID-19. Unfortunately, side effects of many of these repurposed drugs limit their use in most severe cases, besides preventing their use as prophylactics.

A large proportion of repurposed Covid drugs are small-molecule medications, antivirals, and immune-modulating antibodies. These are already approved for other indications (like hydroxychloroquine, ribavirin, favipiravir), or under clinical trials, but not yet approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, FDA (like, remdesivir, galidesivir, leronlimab).

If proven effective, these drugs would offer several advantages from a rapid- response perspective, such as the availability of safety data. In addition, several of these drugs offer broad-spectrum activity that makes it more likely they will remain functional even if the SARS-CoV-2 virus mutates. However, there are also exists some critical issues with repurposed Covid drugs.

Some critical issues with repurposed Covid drugs:

Let me cite below two examples, just to drive home the point of some critical medical issues, now existing with these repurposed Covid drugs:

Hydroxychloroquine – the malaria drug, when used as directed, commonly produces nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, besides muscle weakness. Importantly, at higher concentrations – only two to three times the daily dose, it can cause potentially fatal acute cardiovascular toxicity. Thus, the possibility of severe side effects makes the drug unattractive as a preventive measure. Drug formulation and delivery strategies, such as controlled release and targeted delivery could expand the use of such existing drugs, the report recommends.

The HIV drug combination lopinavir and ritonavir, which is under evaluation as a COVID-19 treatment, has side effects that include diarrhea, nausea, and liver damage. With a half-life of about 4–6 hours, the systemic concentrations can vary by a factor of eight between peak and trough. Developing a controlled-release formulation that maintains the minimum effective drug concentration, could mitigate side effects by reducing the steady-state drug concentration by as much as eightfold and reducing the burden on the liver by 81%, the above study, published by the AIchE in June 2020, highlighted.

At this point, for greater clarity, let me recapitulate what NDDS really means.

NDDS – clinical and marketing relevance:

Novel Drug Delivers Systems or NDDS generally ‘refers to the approaches, formulations, technologies, and systems for transporting a pharmaceutical compound in the body as needed to safely achieve its desired therapeutic effects.’

This process was lucidly explained in a contemporary article, which also inferred that the method by which a drug is delivered can have a significant effect on its efficacy and safety profile.

Yet another paper underscored, ‘if therapeutic agents can be made more efficacious and safer, using an improved drug delivery system, could achieve both –lucrative marketing opportunities for pharmaceutical companies, alongside advancement in the treatment of diseases of mankind.’ Moreover, NDDS can also help maintain the drug concentration in the therapeutic range for a longer period of time and deliver the content to the site of action if required.

Leaving aside the technical details behind these mechanisms let me underscore - that NDDS will be a boon for the repurposing of drugs, was also discussed in detail in an article titled, ‘Role of Novel Drug Delivery Systems in Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19): Time to Act Now,’ published on September 09, 2020.

Some broad categories of NDDS and new initiatives:

For this purpose, some of the broad categories of NDDS may include the following:

Sustained- or controlled drug delivery systems provide drug action at a pre-determined rate.
Localized drug delivery devices for drug release in the vicinity of the target.
Rate – pre-programed drug delivery systems.
Targeted drug delivery provides drug action by using carries, which recognize their receptor at the target.

It goes without saying that NDDS mechanism may be used both for new molecules that may eventually be developed, and also for the existing repurposed drugs for Covid treatment.

Some encouraging initiatives of NDDS for Covid drugs:

The encouraging news is pharma initiatives in this regard has already commenced. For example, unprecedented interest in inhaled delivery of antiviral drugs has led to Aerogen’s involvement in multiple COVID-19 drug development initiatives, with more than 15 leading pharmaceutical companies - worldwide.

Several of these collaborations are already in clinical trials. Others are also on track to enter studies on moderately and severely ill COVID-19 patients, the Press Information of Aerogen dated October 22, 2020 highlighted. Let me cite below two more examples in this area, to explain the intensity of work that has commenced in the NDDS space for repurposed Covid drugs.

Covis Pharma’s inhaled glucocorticoid, Alvesco (ciclesonide) has entered Phase III safety and efficacy trial in 400 non-hospitalized patients -12 years of age and older with symptomatic COVID-19. The product is delivered twice daily via a pressurized metered dose inhaler (pMDI).

Senzer Pharmaceuticals - a UK based company, is also in the process of formulating two specific medicines with antiviral properties, to allow them to be inhaled directly into the respiratory tract. The primary aim is to reduce the number of COVID-19 patients requiring intensive care treatment. Senzer is also using a pMDI for targeted drug delivery of actives through inhalation, as it offers potential advantages over oral intake. These include, ease of administration, assisting early treatment, allowing a lower dose by reducing unwanted side effects and supporting the safety profile of the products.

Experts consider preparations of inhalable particles for local delivery is a simpler approach. This is because the lungs comprise only about 2% of the total body weight, targeted delivery could reduce the amount of drug required by a factor of 50 or more, as compared to oral administration.

Be that as it may, the primary purpose of all such initiatives is to ensure more effective and safer drug delivery to Covid patients. It is now up to the pharma marketing leadership to ascertain how to leverage such NDDS opportunities to deliver extra patient-value, simultaneously creating a cutting edge for marketing these repurposed brands.

Impact of Covid on the NDDS market segments:

The May 11, 2020 report titled, ‘Drug Delivery Systems Market Forecast, Trend Analysis & Competition Tracking – Global Market Insights 2020 to 2025,’ presents some interesting details in this area. It forecasts, the global drug delivery systems market shall register an upswing, expanding at a strong CAGR of 7.0% during the forecast period (2020-2025).

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic is expected to further heighten prospects of NDDS, with the number of infections still increasing every day. Consequently, many leading pharma companies have accelerated production of essential drug delivery systems, as stated above. According to the above report, the key growth drivers of the NDDS market include:

Targeted drug delivery - being most dominant, is expected to capture nearly half of the global NDDS market, expanding at a healthy CAGR of 6.8% across the above forecast period.

Polymeric drug delivery segment is anticipated to be the second-most lucrative area, expanding at a CAGR of 7.3% across the forecast period. The popularity of this delivery type is attributed to its efficiency in localized drug delivery in large amounts, alongside lowering drug toxicity rate. The polymeric drug delivery segment is expected to capture more than 1/3^rd of the global drug delivery systems market during the forecast period.

Application of nanotechnology is another key growth determinant for the segment. Insertion of nanoparticles help penetrate the targeted tissue in a much better manner. These particles are easily absorbed by cells, facilitating efficient drug delivery.

Microneedle drug delivery helps deliver vaccines or other drugs across various barriers.

Conclusion:

The Covid clock keeps ticking. As on November 22, 2020 morning, India recorded a staggering figure of 9,095,908 of Coronavirus cases with 133,263 deaths. The average number of daily new cases appeared, after the festive season, have started climbing up again. The threat of subsequent waves for further spread of Covid infection now looms large.

In this regard, many experts initially thought that Covid vaccines will be magic bullets to win the war against the new Coronavirus. But in the most recent times, this situation has changed, and it is no longer so – not even Pfizer vaccine. Indian media also deliberated the same on November 05, 2020.

Under this backdrop, Arthur L. Caplan, professor of bioethics at New York University’s Grossman School of Medicine, who wrote a 2017 book on vaccine ethics and policy have also made a profound comment. He said recently: “We’re going to have to continue our behavioral efforts - the masking and distancing and the quarantining and the testing and so on — in parallel with vaccination because it would be very, very surprising if we got a very highly effective vaccine first one out of the box.”

Currently, the world doesn’t have any clinically proven new Covid treatment drugs, either. What we have now is a number of repurposed Covid drugs, many of these are in advanced stage of clinical trials. As and when these are approved by the country’s regulators, pharma marketers will have a task cut to excel with those – among many ‘me-too’ types. In this scenario, there will be a critical need to create greater patient-value with a company’s own repurposed brand, where right application of NDDS technology could play a game changing role. The time to keep pondering is over. Time to decide is – now.

By: Tapan J. Ray

Neutralize Covid-19 Impact on Drug Prices And Market Access For Faster Recovery

Posted on September 14, 2020 by Tapan Ray

Covid-19 pandemic that has not spared any facet of human lives and livelihoods, has also reignited several ongoing debates related to the drug industry. The need to urgently resolve these issues grows manifold, as the real magnitude of this health crisis doesn’t seem to be clear even to the key Government decision makers.

This is vindicated by the research paper, written by government scientists and other experts, published on September 10, 2020 in the Indian Journal of Medical Research. It reveals, India had nearly 6.5 million cases as early as May 2020. Whereas, according to the health ministry, the total number cases stood at around 180,000 in late May. This happened because, ‘large numbers of cases could have gone under the radar earlier this year, because testing was limited to symptomatic patients or states had varying testing rates,’ the paper highlighted.

From the pharma industry perspective, a pandemic of such magnitude is also causing indefinite delay in pre-planned market access of several important drugs and vaccines. Some are due to technical reasons. However, many others are related to their value-based cost-effectiveness in the new normal, when the pandemic has put enormous strain on health expenditure, across the world.

In this situation, past mechanisms of new drug pricing, are required to undergo significant changes. The new yardsticks, I reckon, will be based on two critical factors. The first – the disease treatment priorities, as will be decided jointly by both doctors and patients. And the second – the paying capacity of both payers and individual patients, based on the value that each treatment will offer – again, as perceived by patients.

As it appears, the impact of Covid-19 on the pharma industry will continue till the medium term, if not beyond. Consequently, the concept of new drug pricing – based on well-documented, differential value offerings of treatments, would need to be revisited and recalibrated. This has to be realigned with evolving patient needs. Considering the emerging scenario, this article will focus on the exigency to neutralize Covid-19 impact on new drug prices and pre-planned ‘market access’ – for faster business recovery.

Covid-19 has increased the drug price sensitivity:

The challenge of increasing drug price sensitivity – triggered by the new Coronavirus pandemic, has now assumed a global dimension. A June 18, 2020 study, flags: ‘Nine in 10 Concerned About Rising Drug Costs Due to COVID-19.’ Although, this particular study (Gallup Poll) was conducted in the United States, general public apprehension is no different in other parts of the world, including India, for various reasons.

Even in America, which is considered Eldorado for pharma business, primarily for unregulated drug pricing, is also changing with the impact of Covid-19. The reason being, reported instances of drug prices are rapidly rising, amid the pandemic. As the above Gallup Poll highlights, today ‘a large majority of Americans support direct negotiations by the federal government with the drug manufacturer on the price of a treatment for the disease itself.” Interestingly, ‘significant support exists across all major demographic groups.’

Other specialists on pharmaceutical pricing and market access, also envisage that pharmaceutical companies will be faced with increased price sensitivity, and are quite concerned with the long-term impact of the pandemic on health care systems.

Covid-19 pandemic would seriously impact pharma spending:

As quoted above, several other specialists for pharmaceutical pricing and market access have also pointed out some critical Covid-19 impact areas, including:

Tremendous increase in pandemic related public expenditure, could prompt further austerity measures in already strained health care budgets, besides job losses or pay cuts of scores of people for different reasons.

The pandemic is likely to result in a redistribution of health care funding towards infectious diseases (e.g. prioritization of antivirals and vaccines) and chronic diseases associated with worsening COVID-19 outcomes.

This may result in more drug pricing pressure in other disease areas, besides push for increasing use of similar cheaper generics and biosimilars, unless absolutely necessary.

Stricter monitoring of usage of medicines, especially in private hospitals, to ensure their use within the regulatory label and/or within the reimbursed population.

Possibility of mandatory price cuts either across the board or for drugs which have been on the market for a specific duration.

The report also envisages, pharmaceutical companies will be faced with increased price sensitivity and decrease in willingness to pay by authorities. Consequently, the key question in this area becomes: What impact will COVID-19 have on the future of pricing and market access? And how to address this issue, effectively?

Need for an appropriate drug pricing models in the new normal:

Overall scenario for drug pricing model has not changed much, till Convid-19 pandemic overwhelmed the world. The age-old concept of drug pricing, being treated as almost given, is changing fast. As I wrote earlier, it started in the developed world, with newer concepts, such as, Health Technology Assessment (HTA), besides a few others. However, to illustrate the point, I shall focus only on the HTA model. It includes a multi-faceted assessment of the clinical, economic, ethical, legal, and societal perspectives that may be impacted by a new technology, procedure, drug, or process.

Application of HTA in Medicine Pricing:

The ‘Working Paper 6’ of June 2013, on ‘The Role of Health Technology Assessment in Medicine Pricing and Reimbursement,’ published jointly by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Health Action International (HAI), is worth referring to.

The paper aims to identify and describe the role of HTA in price-setting and reimbursement of pharmaceuticals, with a focus on its use in low and middle-income countries (LMICs). However, as Covid-19 is now fueling the drug price sensitivity across the globe, and not just in the LMIC, this reference will help drive home the point, as one faces today.

While combating health care resource crunch in the face of the Coronavirus quagmire, many countries are contemplating a variety of approaches to maintain affordable access to healthcare for patients. The concept of HTA is one such common approach. It includes pharmaceuticals, vaccines, medical devices, medical and surgical procedures, besides the systems within which health is protected and maintained.

Relevance of a recalibrated HTA in the new normal:

For a new drug, as the Institute For Clinical And Economic Review (ICER) puts it, a final HTA report would attempt to answer the following questions, besides a few others:

Is it safe and effective?
Which patients benefit the most?
Is there a meaningful improvement in health status?
Can all people afford to pay who might need it?
Will it offer a good value in the long run?
What other considerations make it important?

These points need to be looked at keeping in view that Covid-19 pandemic has seriously impacted the health care spending. Thus, the process needs to be recalibrated in the new normal. In any case, HTA has the potential to play a critical role in new drug pricing, by assessing the intrinsic value of medicines that can significantly expand patient-access to care. In tandem, it could maximize the value for money in health expenditure with most efficient allocation of scarce health resources, that most countries are facing today. Nevertheless, there could well be a few company or country specific barriers to capture the value of a drug or treatment, as well. A robust plan for their mitigation needs to be well-thought through, to ensure effective implementation and achieve desirable outcomes.

HTA in India:

At least, on paper HTA exists even in India. The Government of India had created an institutional arrangement called “Health Technology Assessment in India (HTAIn)”, under the Department of Health Research (DHR). It was entrusted with collation and the generation of evidences on cost effectiveness and safety of health care interventions, including medicines and devices.

The key goals are, to reduce the cost of patient care, overall cost of medical treatment, reduction in out of pocket expenditure of patients, besides streamlining the medical reimbursement procedures. Nevertheless, it remains a million dollar question whether India would leverage this system to ensure fair pricing of new drugs in India.

Some pre-requisites to implement HTA – afresh:

In those countries, where HTA for drug pricing and reimbursement doesn’t already exist, there could be several pre-requisites. These may include, as the above paper indicates, establishing a medicines regulatory system, developing and enforcing legislation, employing the appropriate technical expertise, and the allocation of sector-wide financial resources in accordance with the decisions of the organization using the HTA.

That said, the bottom-line is, the quest to arrive at fair pricing for a new drug, could also help ‘market access’, especially in a difficult time, like today’s health care crisis. In that endeavor, let me briefly dwell on the concept of ‘fair pricing a drug’.

The concept of ‘fair pricing a drug’:

This issue has been well deliberated by many experts around the world. However, let me quote a recent article – ‘Defining the concept of fair pricing for medicines,’ published by The BMJ on January 13, 2020.

The paper articulates, ‘a fair price for a medicine is affordable to the buyer while covering the seller’s costs and providing a reasonable profit margin. Within a fair pricing zone, a specific price may be higher or lower, possibly reflecting differential value.

Interestingly, the authors also noted: ‘Applying the framework to decision making would require access to data on R&D, manufacturing, and distribution costs, which is generally not publicly disclosed. This lack of transparency about costs undermines efforts to assess the fairness of medicines prices.’

The article underscored, lack of transparency in these areas, ‘also exacerbates information asymmetry to the sellers’ advantage.’ It suggested, disclosure can be enforced through legislation, regulation, and judicial action. Or as a condition of receiving public research funds, tax benefits, regulatory approval. Or listing in a formulary for reimbursement. ‘In the absence of disclosure, decision makers may rely on reasonable estimates based on publicly available information,’ the paper concluded.

Conclusion:

As recorded in the morning of September 13, 2020, total Coronavirus cases in India have reached a staggering figure of 4,754,356 with 78,614 deaths, overtaking Brazil. This trend continues going North, as days pass by.

All-pervasive Covid-19 pandemic is fueling severe resource constraints, especially for health care. Amid this complexity, to combat this deadly virus – alongside other non-Covid related illnesses – value added drugs and treatments could help overcome many hurdles in this area. They could help improve cost-effectiveness of treatments to price-sensitive patients, besides other stakeholders.

Recalibrated HTA mechanism, which I have used in this article as an example to effectively overcome prevailing drug price sensitivity, is one among a few others. Importantly, HTA mechanism exists even in India. It can be appropriately used for new drugs and vaccines pricing, if the Government wishes to.

On the other hand, it’s up to individual companies to choose any other price-value model’ that they will deem appropriate, to arrive at a ‘fair value for new drugs’. However, the goal remains common for all - Neutralizing Covid-19 impact on drug prices and market access, to ensure faster recovery of the business.

By: Tapan J. Ray

Setting A Cost Of Time That Patients May Gain From A New Therapy

Posted on March 16, 2020 by Tapan Ray

Since quite some, an intense ongoing debate about setting a cost of time, often by a few months, that patients could possibly gain from a new therapy for complex diseases. The answer still remains elusive. Meanwhile, newer therapies for treating cancer, such as, Kymriah, priced at US$ 475,000, alongside several rare diseases, hit the market with jaw-dropping prices. The latest being - Zolgensma of Novartis, carrying a price tag of US$ 2.12 million – the most expensive treatment ever. This trend assumes greater significance as Bio – claimed as the world’s largest trade association representing biotechnology companies, and related organizations, across the United States and in more than 30 other nations, also makes some interesting points in this area.

This article will dwell on the relevance of this important issue, both in today’s and also in the future perspective. It will try to explore, why pharma and biotech companies are not keen to use a ‘transparent multi-factorial life-value calculator’, especially for prolonging life or curing an incurable disease, with a high-priced novel therapy.

Emotional ads to justify the trend, against tough practical questions:

A part of a sleek looking advertisement from Bio, depicting the power of new therapies to prolong life, carries a headline – ‘Time. The Currency of Life,” followed by three emotive lines and two equally emotive questions: “Another decade with a spouse. A few more years with your best friend. A rich, fuller life rather than one cut short. How do we place value on these?” It then asks: “What is more precious? What is more priceless?”

Turning this emotive question on its head to a rational one, an article published in the Stat News on February 25, 2016 questioned: “How much is an extra month of life worth?” It asked the drug makers to calculate the same. The same article also quoted a Yale University economist and practicing radiologist asking: “It’s all well and good to just say life is priceless, but the reality is we are paying for it.”

Emotive ads try to justify funding towards innovation for such drugs:

The same advertisement, as above, while trying to indirectly justify such exorbitant drug costs, used yet another emotive note in its playbook. It emphasized: “By continuing to fund the innovation pipeline that has served us so well, we will be able to reduce the costs associated with modern-day health care.”

Such claims are being scientifically challenged – head on, by many important studies. To illustrate this point, I shall quote the following two, both were published in the JAMA Network. The first one in the JAMA Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery and the next one in JAMA Oncology.

The first article is the ‘John Conley Lecture’, carrying a title, ‘Unintended Consequences of Expensive Cancer Therapeutics—The Pursuit of Marginal Indications and a Me-Too Mentality That Stifles Innovation and Creativity,’ appeared on December 2014. On innovative drugs of such genre, the paper concluded: “The use of expensive therapies with marginal benefits for their approved indications and for unproven indications is contributing to the rising cost of cancer care. We believe that expensive therapies are stifling progress, by:

Encouraging enormous expenditures of time, money, and resources on marginal therapeutic indications and
Promoting a me-too mentality that is stifling innovation and creativity.

The second article is an ‘original investigation, titled ‘Assessment of Overall Survival, Quality of Life, and Safety Benefits Associated with New Cancer Medicines.’ It also underscored: ‘Although innovation in the oncology drug market has contributed to improvements in therapy, the magnitude and dimension of clinical benefits vary widely, and there may be reasons to doubt that claims of efficacy reflect real-world effectiveness exactly.’

Here again, the emotional appeal is being made by creating a ‘perfect World’ scenario. Whereas, scientific analysis of the innovative and high-priced drugs, reveals the reality for other stakeholders to take note of. Different pharma trade associations, although being a part of the same orchestrated effort, try differently to take the eyes off the humongous prices of new life-saving drugs. But many continue to believe that new cancer drug prices have long gone beyond control.

90 percent Biopharma companies do not earn a profit – A bizarre claim?

As is well-known, besides justifying high drug prices by highlighting ‘high R&D cost,’ drug manufacturers often say, as the Bio ad campaign makes an eyebrow raising claim – “Of the approximately 1,200 Biopharma companies in the United States, more than 90 percent do not earn a profit.”

Citing the example of the US market where drug prices are very high, it justifies, the general focus on list prices of the drugs is misplaced. This is because, the ‘manufacturers provide billions of dollars in rebates and discounts on their innovative therapies annually, to federal, state and private payors, in addition to offering direct assistance through patient assistance programs.’ It further added, these discounts vary but can result into a significant total of as much as 50 percent or greater depending on the program.

Experts have challenged even this claim that the list prices do matter, even in the US, for many, including uninsured population and those with co-payment arrangement, which are not based on the discounted prices. Leaving aside America, what happens in those countries, such as India, where out-of-pocket expenses on health care are considered the highest in the world?

With new cancer drug prices going beyond control, the price of postponing death is growing:

That the new cancer drug prices have long gone beyond control, isn’t a new realization. A research paper, published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology on May 06, 2013, also noted emphatically: ‘Allowing the producer-dominated market to set drug prices has spiraled the cost of cancer drugs out of control.’ So did another 2015 study, published in the Journal of Economic Perspective.

According to various studies, such as the one published in the JAMA Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, as quoted above, also found after studying over 70 of such new drugs that the median improvement in survival was around 2.1months. Some other reports indicated this number to be around 3.5 months on an average.

Interestingly, the 2015 study, published in the Journal of Economic Perspective found that ‘the price of postponing death is growing. In 2013, one extra year of life for cancer patients costs US$ 207,000, on average, nearly quadruple what it did in 1995.

Is it quality of life over the quantity of life, or vice versa?

The above findings may lead one to the critical question – what type of treatment choice would create the most desirable net impact on individual cancer patients? This evaluation should include all the three parameters – the extent of prolongation of the ‘Length of Life (LoL)’, the ‘Quality of Life (QoL)’ the patients experience during this period – and the additional drug cost that needs to be incurred.

It should ideally be up to patients whether they will choose quality over quantity of life or vice versa. To facilitate this process, an informed briefing by the doctor on the most likely scenario, vis-à-vis other available treatment alternatives, is expected to help individual cancer patient exercise the best affordable individual option.

This point was scientifically addressed in a research article - ‘Quality of life versus length of life considerations in cancer patients: A systematic literature review,’ published in the Journal of Psycho-Oncology on May 15, 2019. The study noted, ‘Patients with cancer face difficult decisions regarding treatment and also the possibility of trading the Quality of Life (QoL) for Length of Life (LoL).’ Little information is available on patients’ preferences in this regard, including ‘the personal costs they are prepared to exchange to extend their life.’

Another related question that also remains equally elusive, is the relationship between the cost of a medication and the amount of quality-time that it offers to patients. Quantifiable assessment of such nature could bring more transparency in drug pricing, especially for those that help treat life-threatening ailments, such as cancer.

Similar questions are raised on pricey therapy for rare diseases:

The cost of drugs for rare diseases is threatening the health care system – articulated an article, published in the Harvard Business Review (HBR) on April 07, 2017. The paper stated, in December 2016, US-FDA announced the market approval of nusinersen (sold as “Spinraza”), an effective Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA) treatment licensed to Biogen by Ionis Pharmaceuticals. SMA is considered the most common genetic cause of infant mortality.

As the author penned, “Patients and providers greeted the approval with near ecstasy, but the celebration was bittersweet. Five days after the FDA approved, the drug, Biogen announced each dose would cost US$ 125,000. Given that patients need six doses in the first year and three per year after that, it means the drug costs US$ 750,000 per patient in the first year and US$ 375,000 annually thereafter.”

A desperate father’s reaction for the price – and the economics behind it:

The HBR article captured the reaction of the father of an infant on this price, who is desperate to save the baby – in the following words – “Then there’s Will’s heartbreaking reaction, which I’m sure echoes the sentiments of many touched by SMA. – “The Biogen announcement of the cost of nusinersen floored me in every way possible,” he says. “Words cannot describe the sickening feeling I get when I think about it.” If this could be a father’s reaction in America, one can well imagine what happens in a similar situation to people in the developing world.

At that time, Zolgensma of Novartis, wearing a price tag of US$ 2.12 million for treatment of the same disease, was also shaping up for market launch. On this drug, the author of this HBR article who also happened to be a professor, vice chair of research, and chief of the Division of Neuromuscular Medicine at the University of Utah School of Medicine, wrote: “A very promising gene therapy for SMA is on the horizon, which would require only one dose and potentially render nusinersen obsolete. Did such mercenary economics influence Biogen’s pricing decision? We may never know; drug companies are not required to justify their prices.” On the contrary, as many believe, the concerned global CEOs, reportedly, get a hefty financial reward, for the same.

Conclusion:

It is not difficult to understand either, that some drugs, especially for rare diseases, will be used for treating a smaller number of patients. Hence, the optimal economies of scale in manufacturing can’t be attained. At the same time, the cost of R&D of the therapy needs to be recouped along with a reasonable profit, for investment towards future drugs. This is in addition to market exclusivity the drug will enjoy through patent thicket.

Nevertheless, despite the existence of several methods of a human life value calculation, such as in the insurance industry the use of a transparent and drug industry specific, multi-factorial live-value calculator is still not in vogue. As the drug industry often highlights, the ‘value of human life is priceless’ – regardless of the costs of drugs. In this situation, many industry experts, academics and patient groups advocate that the ongoing uncontrolled pricing mechanism for such medicines should be brought under a leash. This could come in the form of a tough price negotiation’ before the drug marketing approval, as was promised by the Government, or putting in place a stringent price regulatory system.

Be that as it may, the bottom line is to understand and find an answer to: ‘Why Does Medicine Cost So Much?’ This issue was analyzed by the Time Magazine in its April 09, 2019 edition. Quoting Dr. Aaron Kesselheim, an associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, it emphasized: It all starts with the manufacturers. There are essentially no regulations governing how new drugs are priced – drug companies select a price what they “believe the market will bear.” Blockbuster first-in-class treatments, therefore, command a stratospheric price, like what happened with Gilead’s hepatitis medication – Sovaldi, way back in 2013. It was priced at US$ 1,000 a pill, or US $84,000 for the full course of treatment. From this perspective, although, setting a cost of time that patients may gain from a new therapy has a moral and ethical relevance – but actually, it doesn’t seem to be business-friendly in the drug industry.

By: Tapan J. Ray

An Essential ‘Acrobatic Feat’ Remains Relevant Even In Digital Pharma World

Posted on February 17, 2020 by Tapan Ray

“A manager must, so to speak, keep his nose to the grindstone while lifting his eyes to the hills — quite an acrobatic feat!” This profound statement was articulated by the Management Guru of all-time – Peter F. Drucker, in his book named “The Practice of Management.” This book was published probably before many management experts of today were even born – in 1954. This epic quote of Drucker is in context of the critical requirement to harmonize management decisions affecting the short and the long-term strategic business goals.

While looking at the pharma industry from the above perspective, one may often find, the quality-time spent, especially by its marketers, on ‘lifting their eyes to the hills’ – looking for the early signals on critical changes in future success requirement – is often minimal. Most seem comfortable in ‘keeping their nose to the grindstone’ to deliver the short-term objectives, with a belief that the future brand success factors will replicate the present ones. Thus, honing the current strategies would automatically ensure achieving the long-term requirements.

This prompts a question, should pharma marketers predominantly concentrate on sharpening their traditional marketing tools for near-term excellence or reach out much beyond that? Today’s article will deliberate on this subject, in the context of changing market dynamics and consumer expectations in the today’s world.

Are the brand success parameters changing?

Scores of data-based assessments of progressive changes in the customer value trend, highlight significant shifts from the past, necessitating an overhaul of the value delivery parameters and the system – not just honing. More often than not, such reconditioning could even be disruptive in nature – as may happen with the change to a well-integrated digital marketing system.

For example, until recently pharma brands used to be differentiated primarily based on its intrinsic key features and benefits, like efficacy and speed of recovery, safety and side-effects profile, ease of compliance and nature of drug interactions during concomitant use and more. Today, the parameters of brand differentiation have gone much beyond that, which could have been captured by an astute marketer while ‘lifting his eyes to the hills’, alongside ‘keeping his nose to the grindstone.’

The evolving parameters of brand-differentiation are not just restricted to the features and benefits, but call for unique customer value creation – such as providing a unique treatment experience to patients – understanding their needs, expectations and preferences. This, in turn, change the traditional pharma marketing ball game, as the success ingredients are so different.

Capturing, conceptualizing and delivering customer value, following the traditional pharma marketing tools and processes will increasingly be a daunting task. New digital tools and platforms – well-integrated into the evolving pharma marketing processes, would be necessary to win customers’ share of mind, more effectively than ever before. Nevertheless, value delivery still remains at the core of the pharma marketing system.

Value delivery still remains at the core – with significant changes:

Value delivery will always remain the core purpose, and a constant factor in pharma marketing initiatives. It was so in the past, is at present, and will continue to be in the future, regardless of changes in the market and customer dynamics.

Nonetheless, what is construed as ‘value’ to capture a sizeable share of consumers’ mind has changed. Traditionally, it has been mostly intrinsic to the organization, revolving around the product features and benefits, as stated earlier. But, today, it is getting more focused on the extrinsic factor – related to the customers.

Thus, creating a unique experience for them with the brand has become the new challenge of change to pharma marketers for performance excellence, as I discussed in one of my recent articles. Consequently, providing this external and well-researched ‘customer-centric value’ has become the new brand differentiator.

While ‘lifting eyes to the hills’, some interesting findings:

Among many others, Decision Support Group (DCG), as well, while ‘lifting their eyes to the hills,’ well-captured the emerging consumer expectations in health care through a detailed study. This was published as ‘Cybercitizen Health Infographic’ on October 27, 2015. Let me paraphrase below some of the important findings of this study:

As customers are expecting pharma to provide best-in-class patient experience and associated services in the disease treatment process, marketers need to differentiate brands through these parameters.

59 percent of health care consumers expect brand experiences and services beyond what the physical brand offers.

Only 8 percent of the respondents said pharma companies are providing a better customer experience than 2 years ago, while 30 percent said so for doctors, and 21 percent regarding pharmacists.

40 percent of the consumers who value experience as much as drug effectiveness, would pay a little more for a drug or a health procedure.

How is this extrinsic value measured?

As confirmed by several studies, going beyond what a physical pharma brand would offer, the customers, including individuals who pay from the pocket for a disease treatment, measure the value of a drug today differently. It is now predominately by outcomes, the patients’ overall experience during the treatment, and overall – cost-effectiveness of the entire process, and not just the medicine.

Thus, the pharma market is sending a clear signal to the marketers to ‘shape up’ accordingly, soon and start with measuring care by outcomes – going beyond the product features and benefits – just as patients would do. If not, there could be a strong possibility of being ‘shipped out’, as the marketing productivity could head south, with more capable professionals filling up the void.

Commensurate changes in marketing success measurement:

The emerging changes in measuring ‘marketing success’ were aptly demonstrated in the article, ‘Redefining Value: What Value-Based Care Means for Pharma’, published by the Intouch Solutions on July 07, 2016.

It said: ‘Once, success simply meant a “blockbuster” – a drug that sold enough.’ However, this paradigm is shifting. Soon, it will be measured by the value of outcomes with the brand – the positive impact that it creates on the patient’s health, leaving behind a unique treatment experience.

To be successful with the brand, the marketer will, therefore, need to create a genuine, credible and powerful data-based outcome story. It should effectively demonstrate how the unique brand value offerings, supported by services can make it possible. The services may include, among others:

Supporting patients in managing their condition as part of their life.
Educating patients and helping them feel empowered in the treatment decision making process.
Helping patient access to medication.
Assisting patients in developing and maintaining a healthy lifestyle.

For many pharma marketers this exercise will involve a strategic shift in their thinking process. Embracing a fundamental change in the way they have been practicing traditional pharma marketing all these years.

Are some of these changes disruptive in nature?

Several of the aforesaid changes may appear disruptive to many, causing a discomfort of moving out of their comfort zones. Some may even try to wish it away, and continue practicing the traditional pathways as long as these help achieving some results. But, not certainly for a long while. In which case, it will be akin to delaying a greater disruption before ultimately getting caught off-guard.

Dr. Vas Narasimhan, Chief Executive of the Swiss pharmaceutical giant Novartis, puts it nicely. He advised, ‘the key to surviving disruption is understanding that a leader needs to be prepared to embrace it – even if that means willfully disrupting yourself.’

However, the good news is, digital transformation of a business makes embracing this change less difficult. Which is why, a number of companies are trying to seriously engage in digital marketing. Let me hasten to add, the ‘digital transformation process’, regardless of promises that many self-styled experts would make, is tough. It makes the organization chart an uncharted frontier and starts from the very top.

Digital transformation follows an arduous path, starting from the very top:

There are many descriptions of the ‘digital transformation process’. However, the one that appealed to me is the one that comes from the Agile Elephant. It describes the process as follows:

‘Digital transformation is the process of shifting your organization from a legacy approach to new ways of working and thinking using digital, social, mobile and emerging technologies. It involves a change in leadership, different thinking, the encouragement of innovation and new business models, incorporating digitization of assets and an increased use of technology to improve the experience of your organization’s employees, customers, suppliers, partners and stakeholders.’

The recent examples in this regard that come at the top of my mind, include:

Novartis - Spearheaded by its new CEO Vas Narasimhan.
Sanofi - Led from the front by its new CEO Paul Hudson.

Does digital marketing transform the brand value delivery process?

Digital marketing facilitates the new and extrinsic brand value delivery process, as the use of this technology is all pervasive in our everyday life. Interestingly, almost all businesses, mostly in the organized sectors and technology startups, are trying to leverage digital technology to create sets of differential customer values.

And then integrating those to the core marketing strategy, for effective delivery of a crafted solution to the patients’ comprehensive needs, will be a challenging task. Moving in this direction, besides creating interactive websites, many drug players are using a number of digital tools, including social media sites, to start with. These are all serving as integrated digital marketing platforms to engage with targeted customers.

It’s apparently a foregone conclusion today that ‘the traditional one-way relationship in our health care system, will soon change to two-way relationship.’ Where interactive digital marketing, social media and other similar platforms, will facilitate building such relationship for a meaningful exchange of information with the target groups, transforming in the healthcare landscape.

Some key transformation areas with the digital marketing system:

As Agile Elephant puts it, the following are a few examples of key healthcare transformation areas with digital marketing:

The efficacy of treatment will be transparent with cost-effective data-based outcomes story.
Data transparency will follow data visualization enhancing how patient data is communicated to them, or how certain medications and treatments are affecting different areas of the physiological system.
Patients will be empowered to play an active role in their health care.
Patients disease treatment experience could be optimized across multiple touchpoints’.

Conclusion:

Currently, it appears, most pharma marketers ‘keep their nose to the grindstone’ to continue honing the traditional processes of brand marketing with an expectation for better return. However, if they could find time for ‘lifting eyes to the hills’ with all seriousness, they will be able to sense a shifting paradigm with a new set of marketing success factors. If not done even now, it could perhaps be too late to make amends for business sustainability.

Many may get carried away by the hype of digitalization as a panacea, but this is just a facilitating technology – to be in sync with, among others, the evolving values of pharma customers, through innovative value delivery systems. Regardless of digitalization all around us, the name of the game that differentiate men from the boys in this game, remains – generation of cutting-edge ideas. Only this can transform – effective delivery of differentiated ‘customer value’ into business excellence.

Interestingly, to accomplish this objective meaningfully, the aforesaid ‘acrobatic feat’, as enunciated by Peter Drucker in 1954, remains relevant and essential for pharma marketers, just as all other managers, even in the digital pharma world.

By: Tapan J. Ray

Drug Pricing: Why Justify On R&D Cost Rather Than Precise ‘Customer Value’?

Posted on December 16, 2019 by Tapan Ray

While looking around, it won’t be difficult to spot many types of steep-priced highly innovative products, where high costs aren’t justified by high R&D expenditure, but for unique ‘customer value’ offerings. Many consumers evaluate those and decide to settle for one, instead of opting for cheaper variants – delivering the basic customer requirements in that product class or category. Although, both pharma and electronic goods belong to high tech-based knowledge industries, similar examples are in plenty of the latter, but hardly any in pharma.

Agreed that pharma is a highly regulated industry, unlike electronic goods. But so are banks, financial services, airlines, telecommunication, among many others. Interestingly, all these industries are building great brands without talking about their investment costs in R&D, while doing so.

In this article, I shall focus on – despite facing a formidable headwind, mostly for the same, pharma industry, in general, continue to lack in two critical areas of brand building. But, before doing that let me quote from some recent research papers wondering, how is this situation continuing unchanged, despite all concerned being aware of it.

Two opposing views:

Just to recap, let me put below, two diametrically opposing views that continue to clash with each one, since long:

New and innovative drug costs being excessive, globally, lowering their prices will not harm the progress of innovation.
Drug industry argues, any restriction of free pricing of innovative drugs, will seriously jeopardize innovation of newer medicines and treatments.

So much of divergence in the views of two key partners within the industry, can’t just continue any longer, without a serious intervention of governments across the world, including the United States.

Pharma does want to talk about ‘Cost & Value of Medicines’. But…

It’s not that pharma doesn’t want to talk about ‘Value of Medicines,’ but not, apparently, to create an ‘emotional connect’ with its stakeholders, including the patients. It appears, more as a general justification for the high cost of new drugs. For example, a pharma trade association’s communication, after acknowledging ‘that many are struggling to access the medicine they need,’ says upfront: ‘Discussions about costs are important.’ It follows a series of much-repeated common justifications, which are no- brainer, such as:

Medicines Help Patients Avoid Expensive Hospital Services,
Developing New Treatments and Cures is a Complex and Risky Undertaking,
Medicines are Transforming the Treatment of Devastating Diseases.

But, the reality is, these justifications are not working on the ground, as these are not quite in sync with ‘customers’ value’ expectations, both from the company as well from the brand. Moreover, instead of establishing an ‘emotional connect’, this approach probably is further alienating many stakeholders, as several governments are now broaching the issue of price control, or some other mechanism to set drug prices.

Pharma marketers need to be eclectic:

Instead of keep following the age-old marketing and communication models, young pharma marketers need to be empowered to be eclectic. They should look around and try to fathom how is ‘marketing,’ as a business domain, changing in other fast-growing industries, and act accordingly. As pharma is a high-tech knowledge industry, let me draw examples from other similar industries, such one that innovates and manufactures electronic products.

Unlike any high-priced, high-tech electronic product companies, such as Google, Apple or Microsoft – pharma marketing communications are more like ‘justification’ centric, for charging high prices for medicines. This approach, apparently, is not just a bit defensive, but virtually negative. Whereas, unlike drug manufacturers, the above tech companies are constantly focusing on the following two areas, for creating a robust ‘corporate brand’ that infuses consumer-trust in each of their products:

Establishing ‘emotional connects’ with customers
Focusing on the total value of unique value offerings, rather than the high cost of innovation to justify high prices

Let me deliberate briefly on each of the above two.

The importance of establishing ‘emotional connects’ with customers:

With the penetration of technology, almost in every household, with a varying degree, though, access to a gamut of information becomes increasingly easy, so are the options available to customers. This is impacting almost every industry, including pharma and healthcare.

Thus, for corporate performance excellence, customers are now creating a space for themselves at the core of the pharma business strategy. Consequently, a need arises for the pharma marketers to enhance end-to-end customer experience. Besides, brand value offerings, this includes both short and long-term customer service offerings to ensure an ongoing emotional connect with customers, for more intense and longer-lasting engagement with trust, both on the ‘corporate brand’ and also on individual products.

Therefore, creating effective ‘emotional connects’ with customers are assuming a cutting-edge strategic importance – in multiple facets of pharma business. More ‘emotionally connected’ customers also act as a force-multiplier to enhance corporate reputation. Although, it mostly happens through word of mouth, in recent days, value added omnichannel communication by respective companies, is playing a crucial role for success in this area.

In the good old days, reaching patients or patient groups directly, would have been a challenging proposition. Most communications on products, diseases and treatments, used to be through healthcare providers. But, this is no longer so, especially in the digital world, that opened a new spectacle of opportunities for crafting patient-centric strategies – as patients become more digital-savvy, too.

Focus on brand value offerings, not on cost of innovation to justify high prices:

To dwell in this area, a series of questions that one may possibly encounter, such as: ‘How do you define value? can you measure it? What are your products and services actually worth to customers?’ Way back, these points were deliberated in the article – ‘Business Marketing: Understand What Customers Value,’ published in the November-December 1998 issue of the Harvard Business Review (HBR). It said: ‘Value in business markets is the worth in monetary terms of the technical, economic, service, and social benefits a customer company receives in exchange for the price it pays for a market offering.’ From this paper let me pick up just two critical components of value, as follows, for better understanding:

Value in monetary terms: Such as, dollars per unit
Value for a customer: What the person gets in exchange for the price it pays

Nevertheless, the important point to note: As ‘market offering has two elemental characteristics: its value and its price, raising or lowering the price of a market offering does not change the value that such an offering provides to a customer. Rather, it changes the customer’s incentive to purchase that market offering.’

When applied in the pharma perspective:

When the above concept of value is applied in the pharma industry perspective, it vindicates an important. Which is, tangible value offerings of an exclusive, high-priced patented products, and the same in its off-patent low-priced avatar remains unchanged, regardless of significant change in its monetary value per unit. However, unlike a patent protected drug, options for generic equivalents will be many, with differing prices.

This brings out another important facet of ‘value’. As the above HBR paper states, considerations of value take place within some context. Even when no comparable market offerings exist, there is always a competitive alternative. For example, in the pharma business, one possible competitive alternative for patented products could well be – when the Government decides to issue a Compulsory License (CL) for make the product available at a cheaper price to patients.

The name of the new game:

Thus, for an exclusive new drug, instead of focusing on cost of innovation to justify high prices, a sharp focus on ‘total value offering’ of the brand would possibly be the name of the new game. It will entail persuading the ‘connected customers’ to realize the total value of both the tangible and intangible cost of each benefit that the product offers, rather than simply the cost of a pill. In doing so, a pharma marketer and his entire team, must have an accurate understanding of what its customers value, and also, would value. This calls for a painstaking research, and a mammoth real time data analysis.

Developing a unique ‘Customer Value’ model:

As the above HBR article reiterates, ‘customer value’ models are not easy to develop. Unfortunately, pharma’s ‘value delivery system’ is still tuned to a self-serving mode and not ‘customer value’ centric.Thus, marketers may wish to note some key points in this regard, as below:

Many customers understand their own requirements, but do not necessarily know what fulfilling those requirements is worth to them.
This leaves an opportunity to demonstrate persuasively, the total ‘customer value’ that the new brand provides, and how it fulfills their requirements.
The strategy makers would have to necessarily generate a comprehensive list of ‘customer value’ elements, based on robust data, on an ongoing basis.
The acquired insight on – what customers value, and would value, to gain marketplace advantages over competitors, would form the core of the business strategy.

The next stage would be a pilot study to validate the model and understand the variations, if any, in the estimates. It is also vital to note that an improvement in some functionality may appear important, but may not necessarily mean that customers are willing to pay for it. The aim should always be delivering superior value, and get an equitable return for it. Thus, enhancing end-to-end customer experience in this effort, becomes a critical ingredient to brand success.

Conclusion:

After the article – ‘Business Marketing: Understand What Customers Value,’ published in the November-December 1998 issue of the Harvard Business Review (HBR), in June 2000, a similar article was published in the ‘McKinsey Quarterly.’ The paper titled, ‘A business is a value delivery system,’ also emphasized the importance of a clear, well-articulated “value proposition” for each targeted market segment.

This means a simple statement of benefits that the company intends to provide to each segment, along with the approximate price the company will charge for each of those. The paper also underlined, the strength of the buying proposition for any customer is a function of the product value minus the price. In other words, the ‘surplus value’ that the customer will enjoy, once that product is paid for.

Over a period of time, high prices of new and innovative drugs are attracting negative headlines, like - ‘High cost of hepatitis drug reflects a broken pricing system.’ This continues, despite high decibel justification of the ‘exorbitant’ cost of innovation. Undaunted, Big Pharma and its large trade associations remain reluctant to jettison their old advocacy toolkit.

They seem to be still on a – ‘Listen and believe what we are saying’ mode. This is vindicated by the December 14, 2019 report that revealed: ‘The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, the drug industry’s top lobbying group, filed a lawsuit this week against the state of Oregon, claiming two laws it passed requiring greater transparency of drug prices are unconstitutional.’

Continuation of such approaches, on the contrary, is further alienating many stakeholders, especially the patients and the governments. Thus, time appears more than ripe today to focus more on delivering measurable ‘surplus value’ of new products, to well engaged and connected patients, both globally and locally.

By: Tapan J. Ray

PILMAN

A Tapan Ray Website

Tag Archives: value

What Have And Haven’t Changed In Pharma’s New Normal?

Augment Pharma Customers’ New Value Expectations With Content Marketing

More Challenges For Brand Launch Success In The New Normal

Create Greater Patient–Value To Excel With Repurposed Covid Brands

Neutralize Covid-19 Impact on Drug Prices And Market Access For Faster Recovery

Setting A Cost Of Time That Patients May Gain From A New Therapy

An Essential ‘Acrobatic Feat’ Remains Relevant Even In Digital Pharma World

Drug Pricing: Why Justify On R&D Cost Rather Than Precise ‘Customer Value’?