Bridging the Gap Between Prescriptions and Sales

Effective treatments supported by sound sales andThe last issue, once an initiative has been designed
marketing strategies maximize prescription shares forand the involvement of institutional health actors has
pharmaceutical products. But can more be done?been defined, is how to organize and align resources.
The equation "number of units prescribed equalsAt a higher level, this implies putting in place
number of units sold" holds very rarely forgovernance mechanisms; from an operational
pharmaceutical products whose consumption doesstandpoint, detailing the competences needed and
not take place in controlled settings, such as hospitals.sizing the resources required to run the initiative. As
Poor adherence to prescribed treatments may bethe type of competences and the nature of
due to a variety of factors, including intolerance toresources required is somewhat different from the
side effects, patient-perceived lack of effectiveness,core of a pharmaceutical company's operation and will
and administration difficulties (e.g. self-injections); thislikely have a temporary nature (due to product life
affects, to different degrees, the majority ofcycle and ROI considerations), different make-or-buy
diseases whose care takes place at the patient'ssolutions must be evaluated to identify the most
home. This issue has been increased by the recentcost-effective solution.
trend, common in both Europe and the United States,How widespread is this model today? Are there any
of reducing hospitalization in favor of territorial care,potential pitfalls that must be taken into consideration
in an effort to drive down the average cost perwhile considering such an initiative? Do actual results
patient, especially for longer-term diseases.justify this kind of investment?
Non-adherence represents one of the most relevantAdherence-focused initiatives sponsored and
health-care challenges today: it can cost billions ofundertaken by pharmaceutical companies are
dollars in lost revenues to the global pharmaceuticalsomewhat more common in the US, mostly due to
industry, and it often increases overall costs forlower regulatory barriers and the size of the revenue
health-care providers or insurers due to the higherpotential to be gained back. Anyway, despite the
likelihood of complications and hospitalizations. Studiesdifficulty of coping with a highly fragmented legislative
on the incidence and impact of this phenomenon areenvironment, these kinds of initiatives are gaining a
usually pathology-focused; the punctual quantificationfoothold and demonstrating their relevance also in
of overall costs associated is complex, so that anEurope, as the multiple sclerosis case suggests.
accurate quantification of the overall financial impactBeyond legislative concerns, there are at least two
is not readily available. However, with several medicalimportant potential pitfalls of the model that can
studies confirming non-adherence rates often in theexplain why these initiatives have been lagging behind
range of 20 percent to 30% of the prescribedin EU with respect to the US, and can thus provide
population at 12 months for long-term diseases (e.g.insights for developing and fine-tuning further efforts:
Parkinson's and multiple sclerosis), the economic- The complexity of managing a multitude of
relevance becomes manifest.health-system actors (usually different bodies at local,
While adherence has traditionally been perceived asregional and national level) not always aligned in terms
an issue of the health-care delivery system, takingof priorities and agenda;
the initiative to tackle the problem presents a- The difficulty in quantifying a proven ROI, as these
growing opportunity for pharmaceutical companies toinitiatives might be beneficial to the whole market for
generate significant economic returns, directly anda given treatment, without significant impacts on
indirectly, especially in those therapy areas where themarket share (thus favoring competitors who did not
impact of lost revenues is highest.invest money in the initiative).
These initiatives can lead to improvements in twoThere are also important factors that point to an
significant areas:increased relevance of this kind of initiative for the
- Boost to sales volumes at no incremental salessales and marketing strategies of pharmaceutical
efforts, maximizing the value extracted from thecompanies:
existing prescription base;- Significant changes, both from new legislation issued
- Improved relationships with the economic andin several key markets and from the ethical codes of
administrative actors influencing the sales process ofpharmaceutical companies, on the scope of marketing
pharmaceutical products (e.g. regional agencies),instruments, and hence necessity to find new
supporting them in reaching their own health-caredestinations for part of the marketing budgets;
targets.- A track of previous experiences in the design and
How can a pharmaceutical company design, developmanagement of adherence-focused efforts, whose
and implement such an initiative? There are two mainbest practices can provide significant support in
steps to be followed: a. deeply understandingovercoming the two pitfalls mentioned above.
patients, the "consumers"; and b. defining how toThe most relevant consideration remains the
approach the health system. This requires trying tobottom-line impact. Data on actual non-adherence
get a deeper involvement (when improving theenable a back-of-the-envelope calculation of how
relationship with economic buyers is a primary goal oflarge the potential revenues (and profits) to be
the initiative) with an "institutional marketing"recouped are, while results from similar initiatives (the
approach, or aligning key actors and getting themultiple sclerosis case discusses good examples)
regulatory clearings eventually required.provide a sense of how such efforts can turn into a
Gaining an in-depth understanding of the end-users ofmoney-making tool, enabling the company to fully
medical treatments provides excellent insights aboutcapitalize on its sales and marketing budgets.
the root causes of non-adherence behaviors andCase 1 - Partnering with regions to reduce overall
how these could be acted upon to eliminate, or atcost of Gastro-esophageal Reflux Disease care
least reduce, consumption barriers; this usually can beGastro-esophageal Reflux Disease (GERD) occurs
achieved through a four-step process:when the lower esophageal sphincter (the valve
- Get to know and segment non-customers: What isseparating the esophagus and stomach) does not
the actual non-adherence incidence? What are theclose properly, allowing acid to back up into the
characteristics of the patients in which it isesophagus; it is a chronic condition and may lead to
concentrated (previous treatment history, stage ofmore serious medical implications.
the disease, access to insurance, socio-demographicSeveral drugs are available for treatment, even
factors)? What are the characteristics of patientsthough they usually account for roughly 40 percent
with the highest risk of turning into "non-customers"?to 50% of the overall health-service cost of care;
Are there patient clusters characterized by irregularcosts (both medication and others) rise quickly for
consumption, while others who discontinuepatients migrating from a mild to a severe stage of
altogether? This preliminary activity can rely on a mixthe disease, a risk increased by the frequent
of retrospective-studies analysis and ad hoc activities;non-adherence to both prescribed treatment and
it provides a comprehensive perspective on "nonprescribed modifications to the individual's lifestyle.
customers," including their characteristics, larger andA leading global pharmaceutical company had to
smaller clusters, and a preliminary set ofcontend with reference prices for GERD treatments
non-adherence predictors.in some regions of a large European market, leading
- Identify adherence barriers along the whole patientto a potential loss of up to 60% of turnover and a
flow: What are the main factors turning patients intorisk of adoption of this scheme in all other regions.
"non-customers"? What are the most critical stepsThe company approached the issue in regions still
experienced by patients while moving across thewithout a reference-price system by partnering with
different steps of their care path? At what stage dothem to support achieving budgetary goals by
they discontinue treatment - if they ever started it?shifting the focus from the overall cost of treatment
A detailed mapping and analysis of all the occurrencesto enhanced prevention and, especially, improved
experiences by a patient and of all the interactionscompliance for mild patients. In the partnership, the
with the different actors (GPs, hospitals, specialists,company supported regions both in the design of
health system / insurance, relatives, other carelevers (screening and prevention packages; case
givers) from the time of initial presentation to themanagement system to enable follow-up, monitoring
physician until the end of the care path highlights keyand outreach on mild patients) and in their
consumption barriers and the underlying rationales.implementation in pilot roll-outs. This value proposition
- Map actionable levers: What are the main serviceof "helping the health system to create additional
components that could help overcome the barriersfunds (or saving resources) whatever the product
mapped along the patient flow? Is there anything thechoice" proved credible and effective, also avoiding
pharmaceutical company may do to lessenstringent clinical trials or requirements of ethics
consumption barriers experienced by patients,committees.
eventually focusing on specific target clusters? WhatThe pilot tests provided satisfactory results. For the
are the priority actions and the expected results?NHS, total pathology cost-oriented measures proved
What are the interactions needed with institutionalto be more beneficial than pure medications
health providers, and how can they be managed?price-cutting, and also offered administrators a
Are there opportunities to build or improve thepolitically desirable outcome: savings through better
relationship with economic and administrative buyers?health-care management. For the company, it avoided
- Design intervention packages: Are there viable andthe expansion of price-reduction risk, while creating
cost-effective actions the pharmaceutical companyincremental revenues through more systematic
may put in place to support treatment adherence -screening and enhanced compliance.
maximizing the value generated from actualCase 2 - Designing and implementing direct
prescriptions? What are the markets in which thispatient-support systems to boost multiple sclerosis
solution is to be implemented? Are there specific legaltreatment adherence
issues or delivery requirements to be dealt with atMultiple sclerosis (MS) is an autoimmune condition
the national level? Is it appropriate to envisage a "hotaffecting the capability of nerve cells in the brain and
housing" approach before planning a widespreadspinal cord to communicate with each other; its
launch? Who are the key individuals (medical,course is characterized by relapses (acute attacks)
administrative) for whom an early involvement is toleading to disability increases and intervals of disease
be planned?stability. While no final cure is known, there are some
Identifying and detailing a potential interventiondrugs in the market (disease modifying therapies -
strategy is not enough; its implementation must takeDMT) enabling to slow disease progression, mostly by
place in someone else's domain: that of thepreventing new relapses and the ensuing disabilities.
institutional health-care providers. Two differentWith an aggregate worldwide value of several billion
approaches and strategies may be envisaged,dollars, the market for multiple sclerosis is dominated
depending on the goals and priorities of theby four companies; R&D pipelines suggest
pharmaceutical company.further entrants in this highly profitable market.
At a minimum level, it can opt for a "lowTreatment of multiple sclerosis is hampered by
involvement" approach: communicate the initiative atsignificant non-adherence issues. Long diagnosis time
the appropriate institutional level (national, regional),and poor communication at diagnosis, administration
get all the required regulatory approvals, and keep anthrough self-injection, adverse effects, lack of a
update communication channel on the results of thestructured medical and social follow-up, and
initiative. Alternatively, the launch of anpatient-perceived treatment ineffectiveness are just
adherence-focused initiative may involve a co-deliverysome of the causes leading approximately 25%-30%
with health-system actors, whereby the "front-end"of patients -- as confirmed by several medical studies
provider is usually the health system, while the-- to discontinue the prescribed treatment within 12
pharmaceutical company adds specific resources ormonths. Additionally, efforts by the health system to
components to reinforce some aspects of caretackle non-adherence issues are usually very poor, as
provision. There are various factors that affect theno infrastructures and services allow a punctual
results of these two models (they can have a rangepost-prescription follow-up; at most, some limited
of different outcomes between the two extremes):services are provided at the local level by patient
- Pharmaceutical company goals: whether the primaryassociations.
objective is a sales growth by increasing treatmentThis "vacuum" of presidium of the post-prescription
adherence, or strengthening the relationships withphase provided pharmaceutical companies an
key influences in administrative positions;opportunity to step in, designing and delivering
- Initiative interdependence with institutionaladditional services to support patients in keeping
health-care delivery: the more the initiative foreseencompliant to the prescription made. A detailed
is interconnected to the existing care pathway (e.g.mapping of the patient flow (from prescription to end
case management, such as in the first caseof treatment) enables the identification of "critical
discussed), the higher the need of co-delivery withpoints", which can be ranked in terms of the impact
the health system, while a more stand-aloneor feasibility of solution (costs, ease of
approach can be undertaken in the case of animplementation) and around which the company can
initiative that complements the health-care offering,build different service components (such as
for instance with a post-prescription follow-up (e.g.self-injection guides or the provision of in-house
the second case presented, on multiple sclerosis);nurses) and their delivery systems (directly, especially
- Product life cycle stage: a higher degree ofwhere no legal constraints are in place, or through
involvement might be envisaged, for instance, for apatient associations or the national health service).
new treatment that is to undergo its market launch,Detailed studies in settings where pharmaceutical
often within a broader effort aimed at determiningcompanies provided patient-assistance services
reimbursement status or formulate position;demonstrate a significant impact (and ROI), even in
- Legislation: while some national legislation (inthe short term, in terms of patient compliance;
particular in the US) make fairly simple a directindirect benefits are achievable in terms of increased
contact between a pharmaceutical company and aprescriptions due to a higher confidence in physicians.
patient, others (such as, in different degrees, theAdditionally, this approach provides a potentially
European ones) impose more barriers, favoring (if notvaluable defense for the incumbent product against
almost requiring) a co-delivery solution (where entitiespotential new entrants with a more favorable
such as patient associations might be a substitute foradherence profile (e.g. tablets versus self-injection),
health-system bodies).reducing the threat of market share dilution.