MEDICAL SCIENCELIAISONS INONCOLOGY (2016)
M A R C H , 2 0 1 6
P R E V I E W O F
REPORT OVERVIEW
HOW YOU CAN USE THIS REPORT
Biopharmaceutical research companies efforts to bring new, more effective treatments to market represent the world’s best hopes to provide oncologists with the drugs needed to give cancer patients longer, healthier lives and reduce the burden of the disease on society. To garner awareness, interest, and trial for any of oncological medications in development in the highly competitive US cancer drug market, biopharmaceutical manufacturers must develop sales/ information strategies that best serve oncologists’ needs. These strategies will certainly employ Medical Science Liaisons (MSLs) in addition to traditional sales representatives. ISR’s Medical Science Liaison in Oncology offers insights into how oncologists engage with 20 biopharmaceutical manufacturer’s MSLs. This report contains critical knowledge on how manufacturers can best engage oncologists in a drug’s story.
153 PAGES
20COMPANIES
Introduction
SMARTER QUESTIONS SMARTER ANSWERS
MAJOR SECTIONS:1. Access to Oncologists
2. MSL Performance
3. The MSL InteractionExperience
4. Information Strategies
5. Study Data
Full list of companies included on next page.
• Understand how US oncologists want to be engaged
• Learn how likely oncologists are to accept a meeting with a sales rep or an MSL to discuss a new product
• Discover the traits of the best MSLs, and which biopharmaceutical firms field MSLs exceed orfail to meet oncologists’ expectations
• Uncover what type of interactions oncologists view as appropriate and effective boundaries not to cross when engaging with an oncologist.
• Pinpoint the information oncologists find most valuableand the best channels for delivering specific types ofdata/ information
D A T A C O L L E C T I O N I N Q 1 , 2 0 1 6
3 0 - M I N U T E W E B - B A S E D
S U R V E Y
1 0 1 O N C O L O G I S T S F R O M U S , E U R O P E ,
A N D A S I A
COMPANIES INCLUDED
ATTRIBUTES MEASURED
AbbVie
Amgen
Astellas
AstraZeneca
Bayer
Bristol-Myers Squibb
Celgene
Eisai
Eli Lilly
GSK
Incyte
Johnson & Johnson
Merck & Co.
Novartis
Otsuka
Pfizer
Pharmacyclics
Roche
Sanofi
Takeda
Introduction
SMARTER QUESTIONS SMARTER ANSWERS
KNOWLEDGE FACTORS• Knowledge of science• Knowledge of the current clinical trial
environment• Knowledge of the regulatory
environment• Knowledge of the reimbursement
environment• Knowledge of what drives success in
your practice
SERVICE FACTORS• Being responsive to your needs• Creating value for your practice• Delivering great service• Putting your needs first• Treating you as a peer/ partner in
patient care
each company is evaluated
based on 10 CRITICAL ATTRIBUTES
data are included for all 20
manufacturers, but companies
with more than 10
performance evaluations
(bold) receive a full profile
Companies listed bold have been reviewed by 10 or more respondents. These providers have in-depth performance analysis.
Introduction
SMARTER QUESTIONS SMARTER ANSWERS
TABLE OF CONTENTSCOPYRIGHT AND USAGE GUIDELINES
INTRODUCTION
METHODOLOGY
Respondent Profile
Practice Area
Years in Practice
Types of Cancer Treated
Primary Practice Setting
Last MSL or Sales Rep Visit
Number of Ratings per Company
STUDY FINDINGS
ACCESS TO ONCOLOGISTS
Primary Findings
Opportunities for Access
Restriction Level
Restrictions on Detailing
MSL versus Rep versus eDetail
Information of Most Interest to Oncologists
Preferred MSL Traits
Visit Activity
Recent Visit Activity
Visit Duration
Firms Visiting Oncologists in Past 12 Months
MSL PERFORMANCE
Primary Findings
Best MSLs
Satisfaction with Interactions
THE MSL INTERACTION EXPERIENCE
Primary Findings
Discussion Topics
Typical Topics Discussed
Value of Topics Discussed
Appropriateness of Topics Discussed
INFORMATION STRATEGIES
Primary Findings
Preferred Source of Information
Categories of Information
Learning About Different Data Types
Data Source Influence on Prescribing Decisions
Influence of Presentation Frequency on Prescribing Decisions
Networking Role and Value
MSL Outsourcing
MSL Clinical Trial Involvement
STUDY DATA
Professional Profile
Practice Area
Years in Practice
Types of Cancer Treated
Primary Practice Setting
Patient Volume
Direct Patient Care
Professional Perception
Influence on Others Practicing Oncology
MSL and Sales Representative Interactions
Pharmaceutical Sales Representative Interaction Restrictions
Restrictions on Pharmaceutical Sales Representative Detailing
Restrictions on Pharmaceutical Sales Representative Detailing – Verbatim Comments
Most Recent Pharmaceutical Sales Representative Detail
Satisfaction with Pharmaceutical Sales Representative Interactions
Pharmaceutical Sales Representative Detail Duration with Oncologist
Pharmaceutical Sales Representative Detail Duration with Oncology Practice Manager
MSL Restriction Level
Restrictions on MSL Detailing
Restrictions on MSL Detailing – Verbatim Responses
Most Recent MSL Detail
Typical Topics Discussed
Typical Topics Discussed – Verbatim Comments
Firms Calling in Past 12 Months
Satisfaction with MSL Interactions – Categories
Satisfaction with MSL Interactions – Mean Ratings
Introduction
SMARTER QUESTIONS SMARTER ANSWERS
MSL Detail Duration with Oncologist
MSL Detail Duration with Oncology Practice Manager
Best MSLs
Information of Interest to Oncologists
Information of Interest to Oncologists – Verbatim Comments
Appropriateness of Topics Discussed
Networking Role and Value
Preferred MSL Traits
Assessing MSL Performance
Accepting Meeting to Discuss First-in-Class Oncology Product
Accepting Meeting to Discuss a Novel MOA
Accepting Meeting to Discuss a Transitional or Follow-on Oncology Product
Preferred Information Delivery Method
Data Presentation Frequency
Information Type Influence on Prescribing
Preferred Information Type by Presenter
MSL Performance Drill-Down
AbbVie
Amgen
Astellas
AstraZeneca
Bayer
Bristol-Myers Squibb
Celgene
Eisai
Eli Lilly
GSK
Incyte
Johnson & Johnson
Merck & Co.
Novartis
Otsuka
Pfizer
Pharmacyclics
Roche
Sanofi
Takeda
Prescribing Flexibility
Influence of Private Payers on Prescribing
Influence of State and Federal Government Payers on Prescribing
Future Prescribing Environment
Future Prescribing Environment – Verbatim Responses
Insurance Programs
Awareness of Insurance Incentive Programs
Insurance Incentive Program Benefits
Insurance Incentive Program Benefits – Verbatim Responses
Insurance Incentive Program Drawbacks
Insurance Incentive Program Drawbacks – Verbatim Responses
Impact of Affordable Care Act on Practice
Impact of Affordable Care Act on Practice – Verbatim Responses
Accountable Care Organization (ACO) Status
MSL Outsourcing
MSL Outsourcing – Verbatim Responses
MSL Clinical Trial Involvement
ABOUT INDUSTRY STANDARD RESEARCH
117CHARTS
AND GRAPHS
SAMPLE PAGES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction
SMARTER QUESTIONS SMARTER ANSWERS
STUDY FINDINGS
14www.ISRreports.com ©2016 Medical Science Liaisons in Oncology (2016)
Restrictions on DetailingThe restrictions oncology practices/ organizations place on MSLs and sales reps do not appear to be overly burdensome� Many practices/ organizations require MSLs to set-up an appointment (52%) or restrict the duration/ number/ location of meetings (31%)�
Sales reps are substantially more likely to face restrictions on offering meals, gifts, or financial benefits to oncologists and the practice (27%) than MSLs, who, by definition, serve as scientific or disease state experts for oncologists� It is worth noting that one-in-ten (10%) oncology practices/ organizations require MSLs to demonstrate a non-sales agenda in order to gain access to oncologists�
Please describe any and all restrictions your practice/ organization has regarding the interactions with MSLs (Medical Science Liaisons). (Base=29, restrictions on MSL detailing in place)
Please describe any and all restrictions your practice/ organization has regarding the interactions with pharmaceutical sales representatives. (Base=49, restrictions on sales rep detailing in place)
MEDICAL SCIENCE LIAISONS IN ONCOLOGY (2016) 16
Restrictions on Detailing The restrictions oncology practices/ organizations place on MSLs and sales reps do not appear to be overly burdensome. Many practices/ organizations require MSLs to set-up an appointment (52%) or restrict the duration/ number/ location of meetings (31%). Sales reps are substantially more likely to face restrictions on offering meals, gifts, or financial benefits to oncologists and the practice (27%) than MSLs, who, by definition, serve as scientific or disease state experts for oncologists. It is worth noting that one-in-ten (10%) oncology practices/ organizations require MSLs to demonstrate a non-sales agenda in order to gain access to oncologists. Please describe any and all restrictions your practice/ organization has regarding the interactions with MSLs (Medical Science Liaisons). (Base=29, restrictions on MSL detailing in place) Please describe any and all restrictions your practice/ organization has regarding the interactions with pharmaceutical sales representatives. (Base=49, restrictions on sales rep detailing in place)
2%
2%
16%
27%
33%
22%
3%
7%
10%
31%
52%
0% 20% 40% 60%
Cannot see reps but can see MSLs
Can only receive samples
Seeing reps/MSLs is permitted but isdiscouraged by practice management
No meals, gifts, financial benefit to oncologistor practice
MSL must demonstrate/ have a non-salesagenda
Restricted to specific duration/ Number ofmeetings per week or month/ Location in
practice
Must set-up an appointment
% of Respondents
MSLs
Sales Reps
© Industry Standard Research
This is an enterprise-wide license and this file is not to be distributed beyond the terms of this agreement. For information on the license holder, please contact ISR ([email protected]).
S A M P L E P A G E :
OPPORTUNITIES FOR ACCESS
ISR knows oncologists must manage their time wisely to treat patients, manage their business, and learn about new medications. In this report, ISR establishes the level of restrictions oncologists place between themselves and MSLs/ Pharmaceutical sales representatives. Data on visit recency and duration are also described. ISR also looks at oncologists preferred sales channel for receiving information about first-in-class medications, novel MOAs, and follow-on oncology products.
C L O S E R L O O K
Understand the various types of restrictions MSLs will face, from requirements to set up meeting times, to restrictions on duration and number of meetings, to the need to demonstrate a non-sales agenda
Learn more in the full report: www.ISRreports.com
STUDY FINDINGS
14www.ISRreports.com ©2016 Medical Science Liaisons in Oncology (2016)
Restrictions on DetailingThe restrictions oncology practices/ organizations place on MSLs and sales reps do not appear to be overly burdensome� Many practices/ organizations require MSLs to set-up an appointment (52%) or restrict the duration/ number/ location of meetings (31%)�
Sales reps are substantially more likely to face restrictions on offering meals, gifts, or financial benefits to oncologists and the practice (27%) than MSLs, who, by definition, serve as scientific or disease state experts for oncologists� It is worth noting that one-in-ten (10%) oncology practices/ organizations require MSLs to demonstrate a non-sales agenda in order to gain access to oncologists�
Please describe any and all restrictions your practice/ organization has regarding the interactions with MSLs (Medical Science Liaisons). (Base=29, restrictions on MSL detailing in place)
Please describe any and all restrictions your practice/ organization has regarding the interactions with pharmaceutical sales representatives. (Base=49, restrictions on sales rep detailing in place)
MEDICAL SCIENCE LIAISONS IN ONCOLOGY (2016) 16
Restrictions on Detailing The restrictions oncology practices/ organizations place on MSLs and sales reps do not appear to be overly burdensome. Many practices/ organizations require MSLs to set-up an appointment (52%) or restrict the duration/ number/ location of meetings (31%). Sales reps are substantially more likely to face restrictions on offering meals, gifts, or financial benefits to oncologists and the practice (27%) than MSLs, who, by definition, serve as scientific or disease state experts for oncologists. It is worth noting that one-in-ten (10%) oncology practices/ organizations require MSLs to demonstrate a non-sales agenda in order to gain access to oncologists. Please describe any and all restrictions your practice/ organization has regarding the interactions with MSLs (Medical Science Liaisons). (Base=29, restrictions on MSL detailing in place) Please describe any and all restrictions your practice/ organization has regarding the interactions with pharmaceutical sales representatives. (Base=49, restrictions on sales rep detailing in place)
2%
2%
16%
27%
33%
22%
3%
7%
10%
31%
52%
0% 20% 40% 60%
Cannot see reps but can see MSLs
Can only receive samples
Seeing reps/MSLs is permitted but isdiscouraged by practice management
No meals, gifts, financial benefit to oncologistor practice
MSL must demonstrate/ have a non-salesagenda
Restricted to specific duration/ Number ofmeetings per week or month/ Location in
practice
Must set-up an appointment
% of Respondents
MSLs
Sales Reps
© Industry Standard Research
This is an enterprise-wide license and this file is not to be distributed beyond the terms of this agreement. For information on the license holder, please contact ISR ([email protected]).
Introduction
SMARTER QUESTIONS SMARTER ANSWERS
STUDY FINDINGS
17www.ISRreports.com ©2016 Medical Science Liaisons in Oncology (2016)
Preferred MSL TraitsA strong theme throughout this research is the oncologist’s view of an MSL as an expert resource for current and future patient treatment options� When asked about the one trait an MSL should have, oncologists want MSLs to be well-versed in how their manufacturer’s products fit into the disease state (29%, top choice)� Secondarily, MSLs must have a knowledge of ongoing and upcoming clinical trials�
Medical Science Liaisons (MSLs) are peer-level personnel whose main job is not to sell a product but rather to foster scientific and medical discussion and be a point of reference for disease education and management. With that in mind, which three traits would you most want an MSL to have? Please select 3. (Base=101)
Again, which one trait would you most want to an MSL to have? Select only one. (Base=101)
MEDICALSCIENCELIAISONSINONCOLOGY(2016) 19
Preferred MSL Traits A strong theme throughout this research is the oncologist’s view of an MSL as an expert resource for current and future patient treatment options. When asked about the one trait an MSL should have, oncologists want MSLs to be well-versed in how their manufacturer’s products fit into the disease state (29%, top choice). Secondarily, MSLs must have a knowledge of ongoing and upcoming clinical trials. Medical Science Liaisons (MSLs) are peer-level personnel whose main job is not to sell a product but rather to foster scientific and medical discussion and be a point of reference for disease education and management. With that in mind, which three traits would you most want an MSL to have? Please select 3. (Base=101) Again, which one trait would you most want to an MSL to have? Select only one. (Base=101)
17%
18%
19%
31%
25%
27%
33%
41%
47%
45%
2%
3%
5%
5%
8%
8%
12%
13%
16%
29%
0% 20% 40% 60%
Ability to gather and present KOL opinions
A broad and deep professional network, which you can leverage
High degree of knowledge around product pricing and reimbursement/ formulary
placements
Excellent communication skills; not only knowing what to say but how to say it
Knowledge of and solutions for patient-centric care, e.g. adherence, disease
education, treatment paradigms
Excellent analytical thinking skills
Expertise in separating "the signal from the noise" in order to provide relevant and
valuable information
Scientific knowledge of the mechanism of action (MOA) and the unique benefits and
risks of a single product
Knowledge of currently enrolling or upcoming clinical trials
Solid understanding of how a product fits into an overall disease-state approach
including competitive product knowledge
% of Respondents
Top Choice
Select 3
© Industry Standard Research
This is an enterprise-wide license and this file is not to be distributed beyond the terms of this agreement. For information on the license holder, please contact ISR ([email protected]).
S A M P L E P A G E :
PREFERRED MSL TRAITSISR’s research shows that the oncologists view an MSL as an expert resource for current and future patient treatment options. The Medical Science Liaison in Oncology report asked oncologists to identify the single most important trait MSLs must possess to establish a working relationship with an oncologist.
The full data are available in the report, which can be downloaded from www.ISRreports.com.
D A T A I N F U L L R E P O R T
D A T A I N F U L L R E P O R T
Introduction
SMARTER QUESTIONS SMARTER ANSWERS
STUDY FINDINGS
24www.ISRreports.com ©2016 Medical Science Liaisons in Oncology (2016)
Knowledge Factor
Ratings Key: Clear leadership Better than most About average Falling a bit short Likely deficiency
Amgen
AstraZeneca
Bayer
Bristol-Myers Squibb
Celgene
Eli Lilly
GSK
Johnson & Johnson
Merck & Co.
Novartis
Pfizer
Roche
Takeda
Knowledgeof
science
Knowledge of the
current trialenvironment
Knowledge of the
regulatory environment
Knowledge of the
reimbursementenvironment
Knowledge of what drives success in
your practice
This is an enterprise-wide license and this file is not to be distributed beyond the terms of this agreement. For information on the license holder, please contact ISR ([email protected]).
S A M P L E P A G E :
SERVICE PROVIDER PERFORMANCEAs part of the “MSL Performance” section ISR provides an analysis of profiled companies’ service attribute ratings. This chart shows MSL knowledge characteristics, but the report also includes ratings for MSL service.
The full data are available in the report, which can be downloaded from www.ISRreports.com.
D A T A H A V E B E E N R A N D O M I Z E D . F U L L C H A R T A V A I L A B L E I N T H E R E P O R T .
Company A
Company B
Company C
Company D
Company E
Company F
Company G
Company H
Company I
Company J
Company K
Company L
Company M
STUDY FINDINGS
24www.ISRreports.com ©2016 Medical Science Liaisons in Oncology (2016)
Knowledge Factor
Ratings Key: Clear leadership Better than most About average Falling a bit short Likely deficiency
Amgen
AstraZeneca
Bayer
Bristol-Myers Squibb
Celgene
Eli Lilly
GSK
Johnson & Johnson
Merck & Co.
Novartis
Pfizer
Roche
Takeda
Knowledgeof
science
Knowledge of the
current trialenvironment
Knowledge of the
regulatory environment
Knowledge of the
reimbursementenvironment
Knowledge of what drives success in
your practice
This is an enterprise-wide license and this file is not to be distributed beyond the terms of this agreement. For information on the license holder, please contact ISR ([email protected]).
STUDY FINDINGS
24www.ISRreports.com ©2016 Medical Science Liaisons in Oncology (2016)
Knowledge Factor
Ratings Key: Clear leadership Better than most About average Falling a bit short Likely deficiency
Amgen
AstraZeneca
Bayer
Bristol-Myers Squibb
Celgene
Eli Lilly
GSK
Johnson & Johnson
Merck & Co.
Novartis
Pfizer
Roche
Takeda
Knowledgeof
science
Knowledge of the
current trialenvironment
Knowledge of the
regulatory environment
Knowledge of the
reimbursementenvironment
Knowledge of what drives success in
your practice
This is an enterprise-wide license and this file is not to be distributed beyond the terms of this agreement. For information on the license holder, please contact ISR ([email protected]).
STUDY FINDINGS
24www.ISRreports.com ©2016 Medical Science Liaisons in Oncology (2016)
Knowledge Factor
Ratings Key: Clear leadership Better than most About average Falling a bit short Likely deficiency
Amgen
AstraZeneca
Bayer
Bristol-Myers Squibb
Celgene
Eli Lilly
GSK
Johnson & Johnson
Merck & Co.
Novartis
Pfizer
Roche
Takeda
Knowledgeof
science
Knowledge of the
current trialenvironment
Knowledge of the
regulatory environment
Knowledge of the
reimbursementenvironment
Knowledge of what drives success in
your practice
This is an enterprise-wide license and this file is not to be distributed beyond the terms of this agreement. For information on the license holder, please contact ISR ([email protected]).
STUDY FINDINGS
24www.ISRreports.com ©2016 Medical Science Liaisons in Oncology (2016)
Knowledge Factor
Ratings Key: Clear leadership Better than most About average Falling a bit short Likely deficiency
Amgen
AstraZeneca
Bayer
Bristol-Myers Squibb
Celgene
Eli Lilly
GSK
Johnson & Johnson
Merck & Co.
Novartis
Pfizer
Roche
Takeda
Knowledgeof
science
Knowledge of the
current trialenvironment
Knowledge of the
regulatory environment
Knowledge of the
reimbursementenvironment
Knowledge of what drives success in
your practice
This is an enterprise-wide license and this file is not to be distributed beyond the terms of this agreement. For information on the license holder, please contact ISR ([email protected]).
STUDY FINDINGS
24www.ISRreports.com ©2016 Medical Science Liaisons in Oncology (2016)
Knowledge Factor
Ratings Key: Clear leadership Better than most About average Falling a bit short Likely deficiency
Amgen
AstraZeneca
Bayer
Bristol-Myers Squibb
Celgene
Eli Lilly
GSK
Johnson & Johnson
Merck & Co.
Novartis
Pfizer
Roche
Takeda
Knowledgeof
science
Knowledge of the
current trialenvironment
Knowledge of the
regulatory environment
Knowledge of the
reimbursementenvironment
Knowledge of what drives success in
your practice
This is an enterprise-wide license and this file is not to be distributed beyond the terms of this agreement. For information on the license holder, please contact ISR ([email protected]).
STUDY FINDINGS
24www.ISRreports.com ©2016 Medical Science Liaisons in Oncology (2016)
Knowledge Factor
Ratings Key: Clear leadership Better than most About average Falling a bit short Likely deficiency
Amgen
AstraZeneca
Bayer
Bristol-Myers Squibb
Celgene
Eli Lilly
GSK
Johnson & Johnson
Merck & Co.
Novartis
Pfizer
Roche
Takeda
Knowledgeof
science
Knowledge of the
current trialenvironment
Knowledge of the
regulatory environment
Knowledge of the
reimbursementenvironment
Knowledge of what drives success in
your practice
This is an enterprise-wide license and this file is not to be distributed beyond the terms of this agreement. For information on the license holder, please contact ISR ([email protected]).
STUDY FINDINGS
24www.ISRreports.com ©2016 Medical Science Liaisons in Oncology (2016)
Knowledge Factor
Ratings Key: Clear leadership Better than most About average Falling a bit short Likely deficiency
Amgen
AstraZeneca
Bayer
Bristol-Myers Squibb
Celgene
Eli Lilly
GSK
Johnson & Johnson
Merck & Co.
Novartis
Pfizer
Roche
Takeda
Knowledgeof
science
Knowledge of the
current trialenvironment
Knowledge of the
regulatory environment
Knowledge of the
reimbursementenvironment
Knowledge of what drives success in
your practice
This is an enterprise-wide license and this file is not to be distributed beyond the terms of this agreement. For information on the license holder, please contact ISR ([email protected]).
STUDY FINDINGS
24www.ISRreports.com ©2016 Medical Science Liaisons in Oncology (2016)
Knowledge Factor
Ratings Key: Clear leadership Better than most About average Falling a bit short Likely deficiency
Amgen
AstraZeneca
Bayer
Bristol-Myers Squibb
Celgene
Eli Lilly
GSK
Johnson & Johnson
Merck & Co.
Novartis
Pfizer
Roche
Takeda
Knowledgeof
science
Knowledge of the
current trialenvironment
Knowledge of the
regulatory environment
Knowledge of the
reimbursementenvironment
Knowledge of what drives success in
your practice
This is an enterprise-wide license and this file is not to be distributed beyond the terms of this agreement. For information on the license holder, please contact ISR ([email protected]).
STUDY FINDINGS
24www.ISRreports.com ©2016 Medical Science Liaisons in Oncology (2016)
Knowledge Factor
Ratings Key: Clear leadership Better than most About average Falling a bit short Likely deficiency
Amgen
AstraZeneca
Bayer
Bristol-Myers Squibb
Celgene
Eli Lilly
GSK
Johnson & Johnson
Merck & Co.
Novartis
Pfizer
Roche
Takeda
Knowledgeof
science
Knowledge of the
current trialenvironment
Knowledge of the
regulatory environment
Knowledge of the
reimbursementenvironment
Knowledge of what drives success in
your practice
This is an enterprise-wide license and this file is not to be distributed beyond the terms of this agreement. For information on the license holder, please contact ISR ([email protected]).
STUDY FINDINGS
24www.ISRreports.com ©2016 Medical Science Liaisons in Oncology (2016)
Knowledge Factor
Ratings Key: Clear leadership Better than most About average Falling a bit short Likely deficiency
Amgen
AstraZeneca
Bayer
Bristol-Myers Squibb
Celgene
Eli Lilly
GSK
Johnson & Johnson
Merck & Co.
Novartis
Pfizer
Roche
Takeda
Knowledgeof
science
Knowledge of the
current trialenvironment
Knowledge of the
regulatory environment
Knowledge of the
reimbursementenvironment
Knowledge of what drives success in
your practice
This is an enterprise-wide license and this file is not to be distributed beyond the terms of this agreement. For information on the license holder, please contact ISR ([email protected]).
STUDY FINDINGS
24www.ISRreports.com ©2016 Medical Science Liaisons in Oncology (2016)
Knowledge Factor
Ratings Key: Clear leadership Better than most About average Falling a bit short Likely deficiency
Amgen
AstraZeneca
Bayer
Bristol-Myers Squibb
Celgene
Eli Lilly
GSK
Johnson & Johnson
Merck & Co.
Novartis
Pfizer
Roche
Takeda
Knowledgeof
science
Knowledge of the
current trialenvironment
Knowledge of the
regulatory environment
Knowledge of the
reimbursementenvironment
Knowledge of what drives success in
your practice
This is an enterprise-wide license and this file is not to be distributed beyond the terms of this agreement. For information on the license holder, please contact ISR ([email protected]).
STUDY FINDINGS
24www.ISRreports.com ©2016 Medical Science Liaisons in Oncology (2016)
Knowledge Factor
Ratings Key: Clear leadership Better than most About average Falling a bit short Likely deficiency
Amgen
AstraZeneca
Bayer
Bristol-Myers Squibb
Celgene
Eli Lilly
GSK
Johnson & Johnson
Merck & Co.
Novartis
Pfizer
Roche
Takeda
Knowledgeof
science
Knowledge of the
current trialenvironment
Knowledge of the
regulatory environment
Knowledge of the
reimbursementenvironment
Knowledge of what drives success in
your practice
This is an enterprise-wide license and this file is not to be distributed beyond the terms of this agreement. For information on the license holder, please contact ISR ([email protected]).
STUDY FINDINGS
24www.ISRreports.com ©2016 Medical Science Liaisons in Oncology (2016)
Knowledge Factor
Ratings Key: Clear leadership Better than most About average Falling a bit short Likely deficiency
Amgen
AstraZeneca
Bayer
Bristol-Myers Squibb
Celgene
Eli Lilly
GSK
Johnson & Johnson
Merck & Co.
Novartis
Pfizer
Roche
Takeda
Knowledgeof
science
Knowledge of the
current trialenvironment
Knowledge of the
regulatory environment
Knowledge of the
reimbursementenvironment
Knowledge of what drives success in
your practice
This is an enterprise-wide license and this file is not to be distributed beyond the terms of this agreement. For information on the license holder, please contact ISR ([email protected]).
TO LEARN MORE: CONTACT US AT [email protected] OR +1(919)301-0106
Biosimilars & Biologics
Clinical Trial Recruitment &
Retention
Commercialization Department Models & Structures
Trends & Technologies
Manufacturing Service Provider Quality Benchmarking
CUSTOM RESEARCH
UNDERSTAND YOUR MARKETSLeverage ISR’s experience and institutional knowledge to create a fit-for-purpose market research project that addresses the business decisions you need to make.
Are you:• Developing a new product or service?• Evaluating a new market?• Targeting a new customer segment?• Entering a new geography?• Needing a deeper understanding of your
customer or potential customer base?
UNDERSTAND YOUR CUSTOMERSWho makes the decisions and in what contexts? ISR can help you gain a deeper understanding of your customers’ decision-making units (DMUs) and decision-making processes (DMPs).
Key Questions Addressed:• What motivates the purchase decision?• How are companies, products, solutions, and/or
brands evaluated?• What factors drive the final buying decision?• Where are your customers won or lost in the
purchasing process?• Why were specific opportunities won or lost?• How do you keep customers engaged and
manage their loyalty over time?
CUSTOM RESEARCH SERVICES• Investigator Forum• Brand, Advertising, and Message Testing• Loyalty Management• New Product and Service Development• Competitive Intelligence• Strategy War Games• MORE
S O M E T H I N G T O C O N S I D E R
DISTINCTIVE – Receive novel insights from industry decision-makers on topics including: service provider quality, patient recruitment, biosimilars, clinical technology, manufacturing, clinical operations, and commercial activities.
UNRESTRICTED – ISR doesn’t sell seats. Instantly obtain access for all employees within your organization
AFFORDABLE – Receive access to ALL reports in ISR’s library, as well as those released during your subscription period. ISR’s competitive library pricing equates to the cost of a few individual report purchases.
LIBRARY ACCESS SUBSCRIPTIONISR’s library access subscription provides your entire organization access to our full library of syndicated market research reports (100+ titles) plus access to all reports (~25 per year) released during your subscription period. Our research categories include:
Introduction
SMARTER QUESTIONS SMARTER ANSWERS
To obtain full access to this report, please select one of the following licenses:
To purchase the report with a credit card or invoice, simply click on the desired license above to be taken to the report page. If you’d like to inquire about a different payment method or have questions, contact us at [email protected] or +1.919.301.0106.
To schedule a call to discuss this report with one of our analysts, please e-mail us at [email protected].
ORDERING INFORMATION
SINGLE-USER LICENSE A single-user license allows access to a single individual user. $4,900 USD
SITE-WIDE LICENSE A site-wide license allows access to organization employees within a particular geographic site/location (i.e. NYC or London office).
$7,350 USD
ENTERPRISE-WIDE LICENSE
An enterprise-wide license allows access to ALL employees in an organization – this is the recommended license if a report has widespread relevance throughout an organization.
$9,800 USD
Industry Standard Research (ISR) is the premier, full service market research provider to the pharma and pharma services industries. With over a decade of experience in the industry, ISR delivers an unmatched level of domain expertise. For more information about our off-the-shelf intelligence and custom research offerings, please visit our Web site at www.ISRreports.com, email [email protected], or follow us on twitter @ISRreports.
ABOUT INDUSTRY STANDARD RESEARCH
>> R E G I S T E R N O W>>Receive $250 instant credit towards any ISR report
>>Earn 10% credit towards all future purchases
>>Receive advanced notifications on ISR’s latest reports and free resources
SAVE ON THIS, OR ANY ISR REPORT, BY CREATING A FREE ACCOUNT
Introduction
SMARTER QUESTIONS SMARTER ANSWERS
www.ISRreports.com ©2013 | Preview of: Benchmarking the Pharma Industry’s HEOR Functions 11
act with confidence
www.ISRreports.com ©2015 | Preview of: Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: Disease and Pipeline Analysis 10
act with confidence
www.ISRreports.com ©2013 | Preview of: Benchmarking the Pharma Industry’s HEOR Functions 10
act with confidence
www.ISRreports.com ©2014 | Preview of: Benchmarking European Investigator Payments 10
act with confidence
www.ISRreports.com ©2013 | Preview of: Benchmarking the Pharma Industry’s HEOR Functions 10
act with confidence
The ISR DifferenceCustom-quality syndicated market research
www.ISRreports.com
ISR's Reports The Common Syndicated Reportvs.
How confident are you?
vs.Data Collection
ISR's proprietary data collection tools and channels support fast,
high quality data collection
Struggle to recruit the right targets and enough of them
vs.Sample Sizes
Robust sample sizes that instill confidence
Often insufficient industry representation that leaves you
defending results
vs.vs.Research methods
Mostly primary research;
always appropriate for the topic
One size fits all; usually publically
available data
vs.vs.Respondents
Sophisticated screening ensures genuine decision-makers
Undisclosed methodologies and
respondent demographics
vs.vs.Analysts
Decades of experience means more insights that are
immediately usable
Junior analysts capable of reporting numbers