Physician Views – Are oncologists ready to embrace real-world data?
As pharma looks to both improve the efficiencies of its operating models and deliver more compelling value propositions to healthcare providers and payers, real-world data has provided the opportunity for an alternative decision making process, which does not rely solely on conclusions drawn from classical clinical studies.
Although randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are recognised as the 'gold standard' for establishing product efficacy, they also have limitations, stemming primarily from their operation in an idealised environment. Not only does real-world data provide the opportunity for results to be obtained from sources that cannot be included in an RCT, but also allows assessment of additional metrics such as compliance, adherence and cost.
Cost – or the ability to assess the value proposition of a pharmaceutical based on its 'real-world' effectiveness outside of a clinical study setting – has emerged as a key facet of the real-world data push in recent years, and one that looks to be embraced by both regulators/payers and industry players.
But what is the physician perception towards real-world data? One suspects that cost is less of an issue to this particular stakeholder, but does this make physicians any less aware of real-world data and do they have their own particular views on how this resource can be used to improve the treatment of patients in the future? Are they aware of the challenges in both collating and using real-world data?
To further ascertain an insight into the physician perceptive towards real-world data, FirstWord polled 192 oncologists based in the US and EU5. Specifically we asked them
Although randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are recognised as the 'gold standard' for establishing product efficacy, they also have limitations, stemming primarily from their operation in an idealised environment. Not only does real-world data provide the opportunity for results to be obtained from sources that cannot be included in an RCT, but also allows assessment of additional metrics such as compliance, adherence and cost.
Cost – or the ability to assess the value proposition of a pharmaceutical based on its 'real-world' effectiveness outside of a clinical study setting – has emerged as a key facet of the real-world data push in recent years, and one that looks to be embraced by both regulators/payers and industry players.
But what is the physician perception towards real-world data? One suspects that cost is less of an issue to this particular stakeholder, but does this make physicians any less aware of real-world data and do they have their own particular views on how this resource can be used to improve the treatment of patients in the future? Are they aware of the challenges in both collating and using real-world data?
To further ascertain an insight into the physician perceptive towards real-world data, FirstWord polled 192 oncologists based in the US and EU5. Specifically we asked them
- How aware they are with the concept of real-world data and the opportunity it provides?
- What they perceive to be the key benefit of real-world data in the management of their patients?
- Whether they have any specific concerns about the use of real-world data in the management of their patients?
- What they perceive to be the highest priority issues in the collection, analysis and use of real-world data that will need to be resolved over the next 12 months?
- Who they believe represents the key stakeholder group in the role of embedding real-world data in treatment decisions?
