Download as PDF, PPTX
Uploaded byAlex Xiaoguang Zhu
Leveraging Patient Support Programs in Biologic-Biosimilar Competitive Landscape
The document discusses the importance of patient support programs in the biologic-biosimilar competitive landscape, highlighting three critical services: access, device training, and disease education. It emphasizes the need to recognize patients' varied needs throughout their treatment journey and the different goals for originator and biosimilar programs. Key learnings suggest that effective patient support not only aids patients but also assists healthcare providers in managing prescriptions and addressing their needs more efficiently.
More Related Content
Similar to Leveraging Patient Support Programs in Biologic-Biosimilar Competitive Landscape
Leveraging Patient Support Programs in Biologic-Biosimilar Competitive Landscape
- 1. 1 SKIM: Decision BehaviorSpecialists Alex Zhu | Ariel Herrlich | February 2016 Leveraging Patient Support Programs in Biologic-Biosimilar Competitive Landscape
- 2. Biologics are facingbiosimilar competition 2
- 3. Strategic levers inbiologic-biosimilar competition 3 Patient support Market access Product formulation Messaging 1 2 3 4
- 4. • Benefits investigation •Copay assistance • Injection trainings • Education • Nursing support • Supplies • Peer resources Basic structure of such patient support programs 4 1) Access to medication 2) Services to improve outcomes 3) Living with the condition
- 5. Stakeholders of apatient support program 5 Patient support program “All I know is that I need help to pay for my medication. I feel like I’m not alone when the patient support program trains my on self-injection, and is there to answer my questions.” “Starting patients on these biologics is a real hassle, and patient support programs that make this easier are appreciated. Injection training frees me up to do other things, and I can use their educational materials in my practice.” • What does my program need to offer? • How can it stand out and impact prescribing? “I won’t prescribe a medication if I don’t feel confident the patient can get started on it. With that said, all these programs seem pretty much the same to me, and they’re all pretty good. I don’t know too much detail about them.” PATIENT MANUFACTURER NURSE PHYSICIAN
- 6. 5 key learningsto leverage patient support programs in biologic-biosimilar competitive landscape 1 2 3 4 5 Three types of services are most critical: 1. Access 2. Device training 3. Disease, and therapy education Recognizing the different needs of patients at different stages in their journey is important Two broad opportunities to (re)create value for all stakeholders 1. Repackaging 2. New services Goals and expectations are different between originator and biosimilar patient support programs Patient support programs are not just for patients - physicians and nurses are also key players
- 7. Learning 1: Access,device training and disease, and therapy education are the most critical services 7 expected for biologics expected for bothexpected for biosimilars expected for neither • Co-pay assistance • Injection training • Educational programs
- 8. Learning 2: Patientsupport programs are also about helping HCPs better serve patients 8 RX INITIATION PROCESS FOR HCPS ACCESS TRAINING Insurance coverage investigation and financial assistance Ensures access and by assisting with obtaining insurance coverage Injection training, education and support Inspires confidence that patients will initiate and maintain Rx Nurses spend the most time on the phone and filling out paper work. Physicians may need to hire staff to handle authorizations. Nurses are freed from providing training themselves.
- 9. Learning 3: Recognizingpatients’ needs at various stages of their journey is important 9 Initiation Control QoLFrustration Symptom change Fear about progression Injection training Nurse support Co-pay assist Education Nurse support Education Insurance change Education EmotionalClinical
- 10. Learning 4: Goalsdiffer between originator and biosimilar patient support programs 10 Biologics Biosimilars Differentiate: Meaningful services: HCP centered services or services that help to obtain access and ensure compliance. Cohesive patient experience Prioritize: Evaluate existing programs Identify what matters most: Certain services are expected - cost of coming on the market.
- 11. There islow awareness of the full breadth of services Reflect how patients and HCPs categorize services differently Clear, descriptive language optimizes utilization There is more room to create value for HCPs Ensuring that patients get on treatment and stay compliant eases the burden on practices Easy to access Learning 5: Two broad opportunities to (re)create value for all stakeholders 11 Re-package service offerings Offer services that make HCPs’ lives easier
- 12.
- 13. Include all ofthe relevant stakeholders 13 What is the actual impact on prescribing? • Ultimately responsible for prescribing • May take different programs into account How do different programs compare in alleviating the burden of getting patients started? • Most interaction with support programs • Deeper understanding of different programs What feelings does patient support invoke? How do those feelings impact brand loyalty? • Rely on programs for starting and staying with Rx • Programs provide assistance and comfort KEY QUESTION RELEVANT EXPERIENCE PATIENTNURSEPHYSICIAN STAKEHOLDER
- 14. Employ a multi-phasedqualitative and quantitative methodology 14 PHASE 1 PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 (Optional) Exploratory Qualitative Immersion Session with the Brand Team Validate with Quantitative Iterative Qualitative Competitive Intel
- 15. Phase 1A: Exploratoryqualitative research 15 Individual Interviews Online Bulletin Board Focus Groups Establishing a range of experiences Broad exploration of individual experiences Projective exercises for unstated feelings and unmet needs In-depth reflection and descriptive accounts Ideation and co-creation Assess extent of unmet needs MOST APPROPRIATE STAKEHOLDERS MOST APPROPRIATE STAKEHOLDERS PATIENT NURSE PHYSICIAN PATIENT NURSEPATIENT MOST APPROPRIATE STAKEHOLDERS
- 16. Phase 1B: Competitiveintelligence (conducted alongside exploratory qual) 16 • HCPs typically work with multiple brands • Therefore, competitive intel is relatively easy to obtain • Current patients with past experiences on other brands • Former patients who have switched • Competitor patients who have never been treated with the Rx in question HCPs PATIENTS
- 17. Phase 2: Immersionsession with Brand team 17 • Discuss the qualitative outcomes deemed relevant • Identify relevant service offering packages • Align the outcomes of the quantification phase with brand team needs and expectations
- 18. Phase 3: Validationthrough quantitative research Metrics to assess current services ‘Drag-and-drop’ classification Measure impact on loyalty Current Services Potential New Services UNNECESSARY NICE TO HAVE ESSENTIAL Awareness Importance SatisfactionUtilization Baseline of engagement/ loyalty Compare optimization strategies against baseline
- 19. Contact 19 skimgroup.com SKIM: Decision BehaviorSpecialists Alex Xiaogung Zhu Manager Based in New York Ariel Herrlich Analyst Based in New York