_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Transcript:
MARAH: Hello. I’m Marah Walsh from PharmaVOICE. Welcome to the PharmaVOICE Webcast Network and this episode of the Industry Vision.
I’m here today with Lisa Morris, Director of Global APLD Services as IMS.
Welcome, Lisa, and thank you for joining us.
LISA: Thanks, Marah. Glad to be here.
MARAH: Today, our conversation will focus on key aspects of the dynamic market and some important considerations for commercial planning and execution.
Lisa, how are you defining the dynamic market?
LISA: The dynamic market really looks at prescribing at both the patient and the prescriber level. The dynamic market incorporates new therapy starts, switches and add ons and looks at the business that’s in play. The static market is really focusing only in on the refills.
In some research that we did, we found that about 10% of the prescription market is dynamic, while 90% is static.
MARAH: How can companies distinguish between static and dynamic market prescribers, and why is this important?
LISA: That’s a great question. Static prescribers are those who are making minimal to no changes in the treatment of their patients; they simply tend to renew therapy. Dynamic prescribers are those who are actively engaged in new treatment decisions. All prescribers have some dynamic business, but others are very dynamic and make a significant number of changes in therapy.
Prescribers can be docile based off of how much of their business is dynamic. Doctors having more treatment changes tend to be much more responsive to promotional activities, which is critical for the pharmaceutical manufacturers to understand.
MARAH: How should companies select the metrics to use in field force planning exercises?
LISA: It’s pretty interesting to note that many companies are already using patient-centered metrics for field force planning. Almost 40% of respondents to an IMS nationwide survey indicated use in physician profiling, in targeting, segmentation and sales reporting. The exact metrics being used are linked to the brand strategy.
Composite measures are often valuable for many cases. It allows you to focus in on one measure.
Some companies are using only the new therapy starts because that’s what their brand is really strategizing to go get. We’re also seeing that mature brands are using patient adherence scores.
MARAH: Are these metrics also used for other field force planning activities; and if so, which ones?
LISA: Marah, we've seen that these metrics are being used across a wide range of activities. There are companies who are using the information for resource optimization, for call planning, to go find the doctors who are doing most of the changes in therapy. Sample optimization is another area that they’ve been using it to figure out those doctors who have patients in play and will benefit from samples.
And then finally, there are companies who are using the information in compensation. In order to be able to use this type of information, it needs to be very granular, meaning that it needs to be available at the prescriber level. And it also has to be actionable for the field force. Otherwise, they’ll just ignore the information.
MARAH: What new metrics should be used and why?
LISA: New to brand is very powerful from the standpoint of focusing activities to the doctors making the most treatment decisions.
When we talked a little bit earlier about the dynamic market, it’s those doctors who are making the treatment decisions. We've also seen that brands with second line indications often use switch or add on measures because they're more closely aligned to the strategy that the brand is trying to adopt. Some brands have become even more sophisticated and have started to examine treatment regimens in use.
Regardless of the metrics that are being used, new commercial models, close loop marketing and regionalization all rely on the granular understanding of treatment patterns. Anonymized patient level data is critical to understand treatment patterns. And it’s finally robust enough, even at the prescriber level, to support all of these activities.
MARAH: One of the concerns was leveraging APLD for field force applications has been the geographic consistency and confidence in the information below national views. Is that still the case?
LISA: Robustness at all, or at least most sale geographies is a concern for any new metrics or data types.
IMS has enhanced its longitudinal prescription database to provide consistency across all sales geographies. Additionally, these enhancements have resulted in high confidence in patient-centered metrics for a significant portion of prescribers.
For example, about 80% of the prescribers writing in the diabetes market have sufficient volume and coverage to create patient-centered metrics.
MARAH: Lisa, is there an easy way for reps to digest and utilize these types of metrics within their own call plans?
LISA: The reps should either be provided alerts or messages on their current reports or a single metric. Having the reps comb through an exhaustive list of metrics is just not where most companies want the reps spending their time. However, list of prescribers who are helping the brand, such as those who are starting a lot of new patients, or hurting the brand, switching patients away from the brand, have been very valuable.
Given that the metrics can be linked back to the core data they’ve already been using and that they're being compensated against, will support consistency in reporting and adoption within the field force.
MARAH: What's at stake for companies who continue to use traditional performance measures to understand and analyze commercial effectiveness? Are companies in danger of being left behind or not having a competitive edge if they stick with using TRX and NRX measures?
LISA: Our research indicates that a number of companies are already progressing along this pathway. Companies who are adopting this information are gaining a clear competitive advantage. With the focus on new commercial models, companies will also need to revisit the metrics they are using to develop, implement and measure performance against these. Those who continue with older models, including using only total prescriptions or new prescriptions across the sales and marketing continuum, run the risk of getting left behind.
MARAH: Thanks Lisa. You’ve given our viewers a lot to think about today. And thanks again for being with us.
LISA: Thanks, Marah, it was my pleasure.
MARAH: There is a lot more to cover on this topic, and you can access the entire interview at www.IMShealth.com/lifelink.
And check out our other interviews on our special marketing excellence series, which features new analysis from IMS and covers additional topics related to new product launches and inline brands.
Thanks again for joining us for this episode of the Industry Vision.
Have a great day.
|
