Medical Affairs Reputations: Melanoma (US)

June 2016 | | ID: MFBF018EEDEEN
FirstWord

Abstracts

• Does your medical affairs team deliver the actionable information oncologists need?

As new treatments continue to shake up the melanoma treatment landscape, oncologists are relying on medical affairs teams for up-to-date information they can use to make better treatment decisions.

• Does your team deliver? Find out in Medical Affairs Reputations: Melanoma.

Comparing teams for 8 major melanoma drugs head to head, the report reveals how oncologists rate them overall, and on 12 key medical affairs services including:

• Providing information
• Responding to medical inquiries
• Enhancing patient care
• Supporting clinical trials, and more

You’ll see right away where you can improve your medical affairs services—and turn your team into one more doctors rely on.

ANSWERING KEY QUESTIONS ABOUT MEDICAL AFFAIRS TEAMS FOR 8 MAJOR MELANOMA DRUGS

• Imlygic (talimogene laherparepvec; Amgen): Which medical affairs service earns Imlygic’s team the top performance score?
• Keytruda (pembrolizumab; Merck & Co.): Is Keytruda’s team better at responding promptly to inquiries or supporting enhanced patient access education and outcomes?
• Mekinist (trametinib; Novartis): Which medical affairs team is more active, Mekinist’s or Zelboraf’s? Which earned the highest overall quality score?
• Opdivo (nivolumab; BMS): Only two teams have no major areas for improvement. Is Opdivo’s team one of them?
• Proleukin (aldesleukin; Prometheus): For which medical affairs service does Proleukin’s team earn higher satisfaction scores than Imlygic’s team?
• Tafinlar (dabrafenib; Novartis): On which medical affairs service does Tafinlar’s team outperform Keytruda’s?
• Yervoy (ipilimumab; BMS): Does Yervoy’s team earn higher scores for knowledge integration or providing information about clinical trials?
• Zelboraf (vemurafenib; Roche): Zelboraf’s team outperforms Yervoy’s on 4 medical affairs services. What are they?

TOP TAKEAWAYS

• Clear market leaders: Rated for overall quality of interactions, the top three teams score significantly higher than the rest of the pack.
• Actionable information is key: Oncologists rely on medical affairs teams for practical, hands-on information that relates directly to treatment decisions.
• Moderate satisfaction despite uneven performance: Although performance scores for specific services vary from team to team, satisfaction scores are moderately high.
• Specific improvements needed: All but two teams need to work on one or two medical services to improve their satisfaction scores. Find out how important those services are to oncologists.
• Varied communication preferences: Oncologists prefer a mix of in-person and electronic methods. Learn which ones are most popular.
• More frequent interactions wanted: Does that mean once a quarter? Once a month? Once a week? See how often your team should reach out to oncologists.
• Updates required: Oncologists say teams can improve their services by providing frequent updates. Learn what kind of information is most important.

An Expert-designed Competitive View of Your Medical Affairs Team

Developed with the help of medical affairs specialists, this report gives you an in-depth comparison of 10 medical affairs teams—answering important questions like:

WHAT DO DOCTORS NEED?

• How, and how often are they using your medical affairs team?
• What services do they consider most important?
• How often should you contact them? What channels are best?
• Does your medical affairs team deliver?
• How memorable are your team’s interactions with doctors?
• How do doctors rank your team for performance and satisfaction in 12 key areas?
• How does your team compare to the competition—in each area, and overall?
• What needs improvement?
• Are you delivering the services that are most important to doctors?
• Where do you need to improve?
• How can your team enhance its services?

Based on Interviews with Practicing Oncologists

We surveyed 100 US medical oncologists, chosen from the largest community of validated physicians in the world.

All respondents:

• Have been practicing for between 3 and 35 years
• See at least 5 patients with Melanoma in a typical month
• Devote at least 50% of their time to direct patient care
• Have interacted with at least one listed product’s medical affairs team in the past 6 months.

We conducted the survey between June 8th and 13th, 2016.

MONEY BACK GUARANTEE!

At FirstWord, we stand behind our reports. If you're not completely satisfied, we’ll refund your money. Guaranteed.

ABOUT FIRSTWORD

FirstWord is an innovative industry intelligence leader serving over 240,000 Pharma and MedTech professionals worldwide. FirstWord offers a range of products and services designed to help your company gain a competitive edge by making key business decisions with speed and confidence.

FirstWord Pharma PLUS is a personalised and comprehensive intelligence service delivering up-to-the-minute pharma news, insight, analysis and expert views of importance to your company’s success.

FirstWord Reports deliver timely, need-to-know intelligence about your products, your competitors and your markets. Covering biosimilars, market access, medical affairs, sales & marketing, technology and therapy areas, FirstWord Reports provide expert views and intelligence on the challenges facing pharma today.

Contents

1 OBJECTIVES, SURVEY METHODOLOGY AND SAMPLING, PRODUCTS INCLUDED IN THE SURVEY, EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

2 CURRENT STATUS OF INTERACTIONS WITH DIFFERENT MEDICAL AFFAIRS TEAMS

2.1 Interactions in the past 6 months with Medical Affairs teams for each product
2.2 Current frequency of interactions with medical affair teams for each product

3 COMPETITIVE EVALUATION OF MEDICAL AFFAIRS TEAMS PERFORMANCE ON VARIOUS ATTRIBUTES

3.1 Evaluation of overall quality of interactions with Medical Affairs teams for each product
3.2 Attribute importance of Medical Affairs teams roles to physicians’ practice
3.3 EdgeMap analysis – Competitive evaluation on Medical Affairs teams performance on attributes
3.4 Competitive evaluation of physicians satisfaction of interaction with Medical Affairs teams
3.5 Need-Gap analysis by product

4 PREFERRED INTERACTION MEDIA, FREQUENCY, AND SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT

4.1 Preferred interaction media and frequency, and suggestions for improvement

5 APPENDIX