New pharma

An entry in the ‘100 Steps for Pharma‘ series It's easier to sharpen a pencil than it is to write a poem with it. It's easier to clean a musical instrument than it is to play a sonata on it. ...

Whilst sectors of the health conversation still appear to have the leisure to ‘devote themselves more to the spectacle of thought than to thought itself’, pharma clearly is not one of them.

Revenue gaps caused by drugs going off patent are harder to close; margins are squeezed; budgets are under pressure; costs are closely managed; restructuring is everywhere.

No pharma company should look at its portfolio of social presences and think ‘job done’.

What job do they do?

Are they advancing the company’s key business objectives, or are they merely ’accelerating in a void, because all the goals of liberation are already behind [them]‘?

If you don’t know where your destination is, it is likely that you are heading in the wrong direction.

Known for decades as a shoe company, Nike is undergoing a digital revolution. In recent years, it's launched everything from apps that are standard issue on the iPhone to wearable devices to web services.

If the new about an Apple iWatch turns out to be reality healthcare marketers had better be ready because the healthcare applications are endless for device like this.   Imagine a watch reminding y...

By Phil Taylor

Pharmaceutical companies and other players in the life sciences industry need to get to grips with new and potentially disruptive technologies to help them emerge from a challenging operating environment, says a new report.

The report can be found here

 http://www.accenture.com/us-en/blogs/life-sciences-blog/archive/2013/01/24/accenture-technology-vision-for-life-sciences-the-tech-trends-worth-mastering.aspx ;

and is summarised in this brief:

Trends that will influence your business

Over the next three to five years, there are six technology trends that will significantly impact how life sciences companies use technology to drive growth and increase efficiency:

Next steps for technology leaders

Most life sciences companies will be hard pressed to understand and serve potential consumers and providers in emerging and developed markets without staying on top of all of these trends. We recommend technology leaders:

1. Prioritize the technology trends.
2. Define an information strategy.
3. Bolster data services and management capabilities.
4. Encourage use of social technologies across the organization.
5. Define a cloud strategy.
6. Change the security paradigm.

Accenture’s biopharmaceutical industry study highlights that from 2013 onward, the negative effect from sales lost due to the patent cliff will lessen and sales will improve.

An entry in the '100 Steps for Pharma' series Millions of words have been written over recent years across media channels about the relative performance of pharmaceutical companies in social enviro...

Revisions in the final transparency rule will give physicians more time to resolve payment amounts and won't require disclosure of indirect pay from accredited education programs.

While Facebook and Twitter remain the post popular social media platforms for healtcare engagment, Pinterest is fast gaining ground.

SAMPLE PAGES-PV CORPORATE REP PHARMA-JAN 2013.pdf Download this file Increasing numbers of pharmaceutical companies are seeking to redefine their relationships with patients, recasting their companies as more patient-centric.

What is #pharma100? pharma, top 100 influencers in pharma. Healthcare Social Media Hashtag. Real-time Analytics.

Welcome to the 1st Annual "Top Ten Internet-Smart Doctors in the World".
Now, why, you may ask, do we presume to say "World"?

Because the internet, as Mr. Gates says, has made the world a global village.

On the internet, one can find out many wonderful things, and, for this page, you have access to things that are happening in faraway lands, as if they were next door.

Doctors are increasingly using the internet, to communicate, to educate, and to use sometimes as medical devices. And now docs are tackling social media, which a few to the Top Ten do. The Top Ten come from all over, from Australia to the Bay area.  There is one from the Netherlands, one from Hungary, one from India, and one from Australia.  The other six are Yanks.  And they are all MDs.

Characteristics that the top ten share are traits of enthusiasm for their craft, intelligence, diligence, intimate knowledge of how the net can be leveraged to benefit healthcare,  and love of teaching.

Due to our deep-rooted pharma commercial expertise, IMS Health offers clients unparalleled pharmaceutical business process outsourcing capabilities.

Pharma: from (e)detailing to physician and patient excellence, a new commercial approach.

The demand for a new commercial model in Pharma is striking. Lots of talk about social media, KAM, gaming, mobile and all kinds of excellences: customer, sales and marketing.

But what's the roadmap starting from the current situation of pharma's commercial business approach, to get to a new commercial relationship for the (local affiliates) of the pharmaceutical industry to its very customers?

I invite you to the scetch of this.

I made this outline on the basis of having gone that road and now look back on the (very) positive results.

Hold yourself to your seat: it might feel like a roller coaster! But doesn't just make that all the fun?

You may challenge me ;-) but thanks for your attention anyway!

Rob

Did off-label promotion just become legal?

OBLIGATORY READING  ;-)

What happened? A summary

On Monday, a federal appeals court in New York threw out the conviction of a pharma sales rep for promoting off-label use of a prescription drug. The court found the sales rep’s First Amendment right to free speech had been violated. Judge Denny Chin wrote:
"In the fields of medicine and public health, where information can save lives, it only furthers the public interest to ensure that decisions about the use of prescription drugs, including off-label usage, are intelligent and well-informed.”

The ruling essentially follows the notion that "The more information available to everyone, the better. If physicians can discuss alternative uses of drugs, others should be able to do the same.”

So far, not surprisingly, FDA has not commented on the ruling.

What does it mean?

What does this mean for FDA?

What does it mean for patients?

What does this mean for pharmaceutical companies today?

If any change is to come from this, I expect it to be slow. It’s definitely something to keep an eye on. And this is just one court's decision. Future decisions for similar cases, as well as escalation to the Supreme Court, may further solidify the situation one way or the other.

 Emily Willingham writes:
According to this Washington Post longread by Peter Whoriskey, the bald truth about industry-funded clinical trials for new drugs is not pretty..

This history of “abuse and distortion,” even if the relative number of cases is limited, leaves consumers wondering how they can tell what’s trustworthy.

What’s a consumer to do? What any consumer should always do: Caveat emptor. We can do no more than that as consumers.

But for people whose therapy choices are limited to new arrivals, whose decisions are about life or prolongation of life versus impending death, not only is waiting a luxury they cannot afford, they may well be the ones whom time tests.

I’m not one of those who thinks that “Big Pharma” is a monolith of evil trying to make a buck, regardless of human costs. The thousands of researchers in industry are not members of a secret cabal obsessed only with immense wealth. But if industry wants to shine up a reputation dimmed by suspect behaviors of some of its own, voluntarily turning to independent evaluation and reporting of transparent data sets is one step toward polishing away some of that tarnish.

So says Emily...

For a start of discussion: the reseraches who initiated the reserach, one could state they are objective researchers as well, aren't they?

I have witnessed reaerchers state that all pharmaceutical research money should be transfered to "neutral and objective" reserachers to perform the reserach! I would say: who is to select them? reserachers are at leas dependent on the very job they have - and keeping up the job, at least in competition with other independent reserachers, might make them less independent..?

...