Medical Affairs Reputations Non-small Cell Lung Cancer EU5
Four medical affairs teams battling it out for top spot. How does your team compare?
In the fiercely competitive European non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treatment market, one medical affairs team leads. But for how long? With three other brands close behind, and high satisfaction scores for all brands across the board, it isn’t easy to stand out from the competition.
Where does that leave your team?
Are you giving oncologists the services they want most? Are you available when and where they need you? What can you do to boost your team’s performance, and differentiate your team?
Get the report and find out.
Not your market? Click here to see the US report
Answering Key Questions about Medical Affairs Teams for 8 Major NSCLC Brands
Developed with the help of medical affairs specialists, this report gives you an in-depth comparison of 8 medical affairs teams—answering important questions like:
What do oncologists need?
We surveyed 150 medical oncologists—30 from each EU5 country (France, Italy, Germany, Spain, UK)—chosen from the largest community of validated physicians in the world.
All respondents:
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.
In the fiercely competitive European non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treatment market, one medical affairs team leads. But for how long? With three other brands close behind, and high satisfaction scores for all brands across the board, it isn’t easy to stand out from the competition.
Where does that leave your team?
Are you giving oncologists the services they want most? Are you available when and where they need you? What can you do to boost your team’s performance, and differentiate your team?
Get the report and find out.
Not your market? Click here to see the US report
Answering Key Questions about Medical Affairs Teams for 8 Major NSCLC Brands
- Avastin (bevacizumab; Roche): Which other brand’s team is tied with Avastin’s for overall quality of interactions?
- Giotrif (afatinib; Boehringer Ingelheim): What’s the one area where Giotrif’s team scores significantly better than the leading brand’s team?
- Iressa (gefitinib; AstraZeneca): Which team has higher overall quality scores, Iressa’s or Xalkori’s?
- Keytruda (pembrolizumab;Merck Sharpe & Dohme. ): Keytruda’s team gets the lowest satisfaction score in one important area. Which one?
- Opdivo (nivolumab; Bristol-Myers Squibb): Do oncologists feel that Opdivo’s medical affairs team responds more quickly to medical inquiries than Giotrif, or Keytruda’s teams?
- Tarceva (erlotinib; Roche): Is Tarceva’s medical affairs team more active than Xalkori’s or Avastin’s?
- Xalkori (crizotinib; Pfizer/Merck): Xalkori’s team’s performance is tied with the two leading teams’ in one important area. Which one?
- Zykadia (ceritinib; Novartis): Z ykadia’s team gets the top performance score in four areas. Which ones?
- Competition is fierce: Rated for overall quality of interactions, the top four teams are no more than two points apart, and two of them are tied for third place.
- Hard for teams to stand out: Performance scores in every area—and satisfaction scores in most areas—are very close across brands.
- Solid performance, but not perfect: Every team is doing well in areas oncologists consider important, but all of them still have specific improvements to make.
- Little interest in digital interactions: Fewer than half of oncologists surveyed prefer email communications. Even fewer prefer other digital interactions.
- “Attitude” adjustment needed: Despite high overall satisfaction, oncologists say teams can stand to improve their medical affairs attitude and practice in three specific ways.
- Teams more active in EU than in US: European teams are highly active, and tend to have more interactions with oncologists that their US counterparts. Get the US report for details.
- Overall quality scores slightly higher than in US: For all but the top three teams. However, US oncologists tend to be more satisfied across all areas.
- Clinical support is the top priority: For European oncologists, the most important medical affairs services all have to do with providing scientific, clinical, and product information.
Developed with the help of medical affairs specialists, this report gives you an in-depth comparison of 8 medical affairs teams—answering important questions like:
What do oncologists 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?
- How memorable are your team’s interactions with oncologists?
- How do oncologists rank your team for performance and satisfaction in 12 key areas?
- How does your team compare to the competition—in each area, and overall?
- Are you delivering the services that are most important to oncologists?
- Where do you need to improve?
- How can your team enhance its services?
We surveyed 150 medical oncologists—30 from each EU5 country (France, Italy, Germany, Spain, UK)—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 NSCLC 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 last 6 months.
- We conducted the survey between January 28th and February 9th, 2016.
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.
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
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
