BEST PRACTICES, ® LLC 1 Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC % Success Factors and Failure Points in Oncology Product Launches Strategic Benchmarking Research, Analysis & Recommendations
Dec 14, 2014
BEST PRACTICES,®
LLC1
Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC
%
Success Factors and Failure Points in Oncology Product Launches
Strategic Benchmarking Research, Analysis & Recommendations
BEST PRACTICES,®
LLC2
Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC
Table of ContentsTable of ContentsBackground
Summary of Business Issue, Key Insights, Findings and Lessons Learned p. 4-17Universe of Learning: Research Participants, Launch Experience, Oncology & Other Therapeutic Area Demographics p. 18-24
Main DeckWinning on Differentiated Product Positioning p. 25-32Winning a Physician’s Initial Trial of a New Product p. 33-35Articulating Benefits that Shape Positive Market Perception p. 36-40New Product Pricing Strategy p. 41-51Thought Leader Engagement p. 52-59Early Physician Education p. 60-70Payer Education p. 71-75Patient Advocacy and Education p. 76-80
BEST PRACTICES,®
LLC3
Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC
Table of ContentsTable of ContentsMain Deck (cont.)
Preparing Market Constituents p. 81-85 Access Insights & Success Factors p. 86-93Winning Hospital Formulary Access p. 94-96Resource Allocation for Key Stakeholders in the Current & Future Marketplaces p. 97-99Investment Requirements, Resource Allocation & Timing p. 100-110Internal Launch Readiness p. 111-124New Technologies for Informing Patients & Physicians p. 125-130Pitfalls & Stumbling Blocks p. 131-150Demonstrating Efficacy p. 151-159Rating Different Safety Dimensions p. 160-169Lessons Learned, Best Practices & Future Changes p. 170-172About Best Practices, LLC p. 173
BEST PRACTICES,®
LLC4
Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC
Summary of Key Insights, Operational Pitfalls &
Lessons Learned
BEST PRACTICES,®
LLC5
Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC
Framework for Presenting Insights, Practices & PitfallsThe performance benchmark and field research have harvested scores of insights and observations. They have been organized into the following summary framework for discussion and planning purposes.
Insights, Best Practices,
Pitfalls
Insights, Best Practices,
Pitfalls 3. Invest in Launch & Support
4. Engage Thought Leaders
5. Educate Key Stakeholders: Physicians,
Patients & Payers
6. Demonstrate Value Across
Multiple Fronts
2. Clearly Define Target Patient Population
7. Utilize New Technologies To Inform
1. Differentiate Your Product8. Avoid Pitfalls & Stumbling Blocks
BEST PRACTICES,®
LLC6
Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC
Differentiating Your Product - Secondary Benefits Can Be Win Themes:Differentiated positioning begins on factors established in clinical trials – such as efficacy, safety and target patient population. Secondary positioning factors have less overall impact – but can be useful in a crowded market – and are often more directly influenced through Marketing. Using secondary benefits can be an effective strategy for positioning a product in a highly competitive market.
As one executive observed during interviews: “You like to go to market with an efficacy message, that’s what you want. If you can’t do efficacy, fall back to safety. If you can’t do safety, you fall back to convenience. If you can’t do convenience, you fall back to pricing.” Secondary or even tertiary positioning factors have been win themes. Quality of life, ease of use, cost effectiveness, patient compliance, or even a celebrity spokesperson are examples. Use of secondary factors varies considerably across TAs.
For Oncology products, several factors were cited as being effective for differentiation including: efficacy, target population, health outcomes, unmet needs and dosage. It is important to contrast these differences against other current therapies.
Differentiating Your Product - Secondary Benefits Can Be Win Themes:Differentiated positioning begins on factors established in clinical trials – such as efficacy, safety and target patient population. Secondary positioning factors have less overall impact – but can be useful in a crowded market – and are often more directly influenced through Marketing. Using secondary benefits can be an effective strategy for positioning a product in a highly competitive market.
As one executive observed during interviews: “You like to go to market with an efficacy message, that’s what you want. If you can’t do efficacy, fall back to safety. If you can’t do safety, you fall back to convenience. If you can’t do convenience, you fall back to pricing.” Secondary or even tertiary positioning factors have been win themes. Quality of life, ease of use, cost effectiveness, patient compliance, or even a celebrity spokesperson are examples. Use of secondary factors varies considerably across TAs.
For Oncology products, several factors were cited as being effective for differentiation including: efficacy, target population, health outcomes, unmet needs and dosage. It is important to contrast these differences against other current therapies.
1. Differentiate Your Product In A Crowded MarketDifferentiation is a key factor in a new product’s launch success. While efficacy and safety are usually considered the best ways to differentiate a new product, new therapies in Oncology also can use secondary benefits to gain traction at launch.
BEST PRACTICES,®
LLC7
Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC
Universe of Learning: Research Participants,
Launch Experience, Oncology & Other Therapeutic
Areas Demographics
BEST PRACTICES,®
LLC8
Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC
Universe of Learning: 38 Companies Engaged
Participating Companies
Research participants included 44 executives and managers from 38 leading pharmaceutical, biotech and medical device companies.
Laboratorios Dermatologicos Darier
TGC MedTech
BEST PRACTICES,®
LLC9
Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC
Participant TitlesOncology ProductsBenchmark Partners
Oncology research in survey participants included seven executives and managers at six different companies.
• SVP CCO
• Senior Consultant
• Director
• Global Sr. Marketing Mgr
• Project Manager
• Disease Area Head -Immunology
• Associate Director -Managed Care Marketing
Oncology Segment: 7 Participants Engaged
BEST PRACTICES,®
LLC10
Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC
Winning On Differentiated Product Positioning:
Differentiated product positioning is critical to market entry success. Rating
the effectiveness of different positioning strategies and tactics for winning in the
marketplace.
BEST PRACTICES,®
LLC11
Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC
Efficacy, Unmet Need Offer Best Positioning Tools
Q5. Winning On Differentiated Product Positioning: Differentiated product positioning is critical to market entry success. Rate the effectiveness of different positioning strategies and tactics for
winning in the marketplace.
n = Total Benchmark Class Not Used
Highly Ineffective
Somewhat Ineffective
Somewhat Effective
Highly Effective
Total Effective
43 Efficacy Profile 2% 0% 2% 35% 60% 95%44 Unmet medical need 2% 2% 2% 14% 80% 93%
43 Clearly Defined Patient Population / Sub-population 5% 2% 5% 51% 37% 88%
44 Differences from current therapies 2% 5% 7% 32% 55% 86%44 Safety Profile 5% 0% 14% 52% 30% 82%
44 Health Outcomes 7% 2% 16% 48% 27% 75%44 Tolerability 2% 2% 23% 45% 27% 73%44 Ease-of -use/ patient compliance 11% 9% 9% 48% 23% 70%44 Dosing 11% 7% 14% 43% 25% 68%44 Cost Effectiveness 14% 2% 18% 36% 30% 66%
For respondents as a whole, efficacy and unmet need remain the most attractive positioning tools for differentiating. But participants indicated that an effective use of a tight target patient population/sub-population presents an opportunity where efficacy and unmet need may not be differentiating options for a new product’s launch.
BEST PRACTICES,®
LLC12
Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC
Positioning Planning Needed for Launch Success
“Generally speaking for all brands, a critical success factor is solidifying positioning. So pre-launch, usually a year or year and a half prior to approval, try to develop how you want the drug to be positioned within the minds of your customers. Then you use that to campaign and message – so your critical success factor is to get that positioning accomplished as soon as possible after launch. Sometimes it can be pretty quick and sometimes it can take years.”
– Senior Brand Manager
Positioning a new product correctly in the competitive landscape is frequently cited as a critical success factor. Work starts a year before launch and it take can take a year after launch to set. Don’t underestimate its importance. “If you don’t establish positioning, they will do it themselves and it might not be an area you want it to be,” said a brand leader.
Source: http://www.mmm-online.com/10-steps-to-product-positioning/article/24881/
13Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC BEST PRACTICES,
®LLC
n = Oncology Not Used Highly Ineffective
Somewhat Ineffective
Somewhat Effective
Highly Effective
Total Effective
7 Differences from current therapies 0% 0% 0% 57% 43% 100%
6 Efficacy Profile 0% 0% 0% 50% 50% 100%
7 Clearly Defined Patient Population/ Sub-population 0% 0% 14% 43% 43% 86%
7 Health Outcomes 0% 14% 0% 43% 43% 86%
7 Unmet medical need 0% 14% 0% 14% 72% 86%
7 Dosing 0% 0% 14% 72% 14% 86%
7 Cost Effectiveness 0% 0% 29% 29% 42% 71%
7 Safety Profile 0% 0% 29% 29% 42% 71%
7 Better Delivery mechanism 0% 0% 29% 71% 0% 71%
Unmet Medical Need Most Effective in Oncology Product Positioning
Q5. Winning On Differentiated Product Positioning: Differentiated product positioning is critical to market entry success. Rate the effectiveness of different positioning strategies and tactics for
winning in the marketplace.
Most oncology heads agree that filling an unmet medical need is most advantageous to product positioning to ensure market entry success. Efficacy profile and differences from other current therapies were also seen as effective strategies.
BEST PRACTICES,®
LLC14
Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC
Early Physician Education:Rating the effectiveness of early physician education and engagement activities that prove most helpful to market entry and success in a competitive marketplace.
BEST PRACTICES,®
LLC15
Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC
Educate Docs via KOL Development and Ad Boards
Q24. Physician Education: Rate the effectiveness of early physician education and engagement activities that prove most helpful to market entry and success in a competitive marketplace.
n = Total Benchmark Class NotUsed
HighlyIneffective
SomewhatIneffective
SomewhatEffective
HighlyEffective
TotalEffective
33 KOL Development 0% 0% 0% 21% 79% 100%34 Advisory Boards 3% 0% 0% 29% 68% 97%
34 Communicating & Disseminating Clinical Trial Results 0% 0% 12% 21% 68% 88%
34 Speaker Programs - in person 0% 3% 9% 44% 44% 88%
33 Clinical Papers - engaging thought leaders as authors 0% 0% 12% 45% 42% 88%
34 Medical Journals Publishing - publishing company research in peer reviewed journals 0% 0% 15% 35% 50% 85%
34 Phase IIIB/IV Studies engaging specialists / KOLs 6% 0% 9% 41% 44% 85%
34 Health Outcomes/Quality/Economics studies engaging specialists / KOLs 6% 0% 12% 47% 35% 82%
34 Meetings, Congresses & Symposia Presentations 0% 3% 18% 35% 44% 79%
Developing relationships with KOLs and conducting ad boards are the two most effective early education methods for physicians, launch leaders agreed. Despite the industry’s move away from speaker programs, participants indicated they still felt in-person programs provided valuable education opportunities.
16Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC BEST PRACTICES,
®LLC
KOL Development Key for Oncology Physician Education
Q24. Physician Education: Rate the effectiveness of early physician education and engagement activities that prove most helpful to market entry and success in a competitive marketplace.
Although KOL development was identified as the most effective early physician education strategy, half of Oncology respondents also consider speaker programs, health studies, medical publishing, sharing trial results, and phase IIIB/IV studies to be “highly effective.”
n= OncologyNot Used
Highly Ineffective
Somewhat Ineffective
SomewhatEffective
HighlyEffective
TotalEffective
6 KOL Development 0% 0% 0% 33% 67% 100%
6 Speaker Programs - in person 0% 0% 0% 50% 50% 100%
6Health Outcomes/Quality/Economicsstudies engaging specialists / KOLs 0% 0% 0% 50% 50% 100%
6Accredited CME grants through thirdparties 0% 0% 17% 66% 17% 83%
6 Advisory Boards 17% 0% 0% 50% 33% 83%
6Medical Journals Publishing –company research 0% 0% 17% 33% 50% 83%
6Communicating & DisseminatingClinical Trial Results 0% 0% 17% 33% 50% 83%
6Meetings, Congresses & SymposiaPresentations 0% 0% 17% 50% 33% 83%
6Phase IIIB/IV Studies engagingspecialists / KOLs 0% 0% 17% 33% 50% 83%
BEST PRACTICES,®
LLC17
Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC
Payer Education: Rating the effectiveness of early payer
education and engagement activities that prove most critical to market entry and
success.
18Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC BEST PRACTICES,
®LLC
n= Oncology Not Used
Highly Ineffective
SomewhatIneffective
SomewhatEffective
HighlyEffective
TotalEffective
5 Advisory Boards: Payer advisory boards to understand payer perspectives 0% 0% 0% 20% 80% 100%
5Reimbursement Prospects: Gain insight on reimbursement prospects in context of competitive landscape
0% 0% 0% 20% 80% 100%
5 Discount Expectations: Understand discount & margin requirements for managed care 0% 0% 0% 40% 60% 100%
5 Unmet Needs: Understand Managed Markets' view of unmet medical needs 0% 0% 0% 80% 20% 100%
5 Health Outcomes: Get reaction to health outcomes/ health economics data 0% 0% 0% 80% 20% 100%
5 Price Parameters: Get guidance on acceptable price parameters for target label 0% 0% 0% 40% 60% 100%
4 Peer Meetings with Managed Markets:Team approach to critical acct meetings 0% 0% 0% 50% 50% 100%
Similar to the Benchmark Class, Oncology participants considered advisory boards and reimbursement prospects to be highly effective payer education tools critical to market entry and success.
Ad Boards and Reimbursement Effective Payer Education Tools for Oncology
Q25. Payer Education: Rate the effectiveness of early payer education and engagement activities that prove most critical to market entry and success.
BEST PRACTICES,®
LLC19
Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC
Pitfalls & Stumbling Blocks:
Estimating current and future risk levels for various product pitfalls
that can derail a new product coming into a crowded market.
BEST PRACTICES,®
LLC20
Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC
Under-spending for Launches a Common Pitfall
“The biggest pitfall is that companies think that they can get away with under-spending on their launches because they have such a great drug that people are just going to go ahead and buy it without putting in the time, the effort and the investment to make it a success.”
– Vice President, Medical
The high price tag that comes with a new product launch is a tempting target for executives looking to cut costs. Not spending enough to support a launch can end up costing an organization in the long run.
Source: http://pharmexec.findpharma.com/pharmexec/Marketing/Launch-on-a-Budget/ArticleStandard/Article/detail/378000
BEST PRACTICES,®
LLC21
Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC
Q42. Launch Risk & Market Change: Please estimate the risk level of each product shaping pitfall that can derail a new product coming into a crowded market. First assess each pitfall in terms of
its current importance / risk level observed during the past two years. Then estimate the risk-level / priority change you anticipate for the next two to three years for this risk or failure point.
Total Benchmark Class
(n=26)
Safety & Side Effects Pitfalls: Failure to address safety signals, side effect
concerns, clinical trial size, trial duration, and other FDA
or physician concerns.
Unclear Target Patient Sub-Population: Unclear target patient population makes
market entry difficult against entrenched competitors -
confusing physicians when to use new drug.
Indication / Lifecycle Planning Pitfalls: Lifecycle planning missteps lead new product to enter market w/
wrong indication, suboptimal dose or delivery-delaying
market uptake & tarnishing image.
Competitive Positioning Errors:
Aggressive competitors blunt new product's
market entry or damage its perceived efficacy,
safety or differentiation -and new product never
recovers.
Past 24 Months To PresentRed Alert- High Risk 88% 44% 60% 54%
Yellow Alert- Medium Risk 12% 44% 36% 46%
Green Alert- Low Risk 0% 12% 4% 0%Next 24-36 Months- Anticipated ChangesDecreasing Risk or Priority 23% 18% 18% 14%
No Risk Change 36% 45% 55% 36%
Increasing Risk or Priority 41% 36% 27% 50%
Safety and Lifecycle Planning Key Positioning PitfallsThe biggest product shaping hurdles come from the potential high risk pitfalls of not addressing safety signals, lifecycle planning missteps, and competitive positioning errors. All three were rated as high risk by more than 50% of the benchmark class. Failures to address these issues will severely impact product differentiation and market performance.
22Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC BEST PRACTICES,
®LLC
Q42. Launch Risk & Market Change: Please estimate the risk level of each product shaping pitfall that can derail a new product coming into a crowded market. First assess each pitfall in terms of
its current importance / risk level observed during the past two years. Then estimate the risk-level / priority change you anticipate for the next two to three years for this risk or failure point.
Safety & Side Effects, Lifecycle Planning High Risk Pitfalls forOncology
Along with the Benchmark Class, the Oncology segment chose Safety & Side Effects and Indication/Lifecycle Planning Pitfalls as their highest risk when putting a new product on the market.
Oncology
(n=4)
Safety & Side Effects Pitfalls: Failure to
address safety signals, side effect concerns, clinical
trial size, trial duration, and other FDA or physician
concerns.
Unclear Target Patient Sub-Population: Unclear
target patient population makes market entry
difficult against entrenched competitors -
confusing physicians when to use new drug.
Indication / Lifecycle Planning Pitfalls: Lifecycle planning missteps lead
new product to enter market with wrong
indication, suboptimal dose or delivery --
delaying market uptake and tarnishing image.
Competitive Positioning Errors: Aggressive
competitors blunt new product's market entry
or damage its perceived efficacy, safety or
differentiation - and new product never recovers.
Past 24 Months To Present
Red Alert- High Risk 75% 50% 75% 25%
Yellow Alert- Medium Risk 25% 25% 25% 75%
Green Alert- Low Risk 0% 25% 0% 0%
Next 24-36 Months- Anticipated Changes
Decreasing Risk or Priority 25% 25% 25% 25%
No Risk Change 25% 50% 50% 0%
Increasing Risk or Priority 50% 25% 25% 75%
BEST PRACTICES,®
LLC23
Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC
Best Practices, LLC6350 Quadrangle Drive, Suite 200,
Chapel Hill, NC 27517www.best-in-class.com
Telephone: 919-403-0251
About Best Practices, LLCBest Practices, LLC is a research and consulting firm that conducts work based on the simple yet profound principle that organizations can chart a course to superior economic performance by studying the best business practices, operating tactics and winning strategies of world-class companies.