How pre-launch scientific activities are associated with launch success

Garth Sundem  00:00

Welcome to this episode of the Medical Affairs Professional Society podcast series, Elevate. I’m your host. Garth Sundem, Communications Director at MAPS. And today we’re speaking about scientific activities leading to launch success with Tim Hylan, Lead, Internal Medicine, Field Medical Director Group at Pfizer. And Nish Kumar, Insight Strategist, Veeva Business Consulting. This episode is sponsored by Veeva, and the views are those of the presenters, and not necessarily their organizations. And Nish, I always love these Veeva Pulse Reports — the one we’re talking about today finds that there is a 40% faster treatment adoption by prioritizing scientific activities. Will you give us the overview of this report and tell us what’s going on here?

Nish Kumar  00:57

Of course, thank you, Garth. So essentially, as part of our efforts to help Medical Affairs organizations quantify the impact of the work that we that they do, we were trying to do an analysis for the industry showing that the quantification of impact is possible. So the analysis was based on eight oncology drugs, which were new drug applications with the FDA. And when we correlated the quantities of pre launch scientific activities, non promotional scientific activities, like publications, congresses, clinical trials, etc, we found that greater levels of earlier activities were correlated with greater launch success. And what was really interesting is that amongst each of the channels we looked at congresses, specifically, really stood out as being most strongly correlated with that success. And also it was most it was the most powerful instigator of digital discussions amongst hate CPS, which is also very interesting to see. When we looked at like publications, like the release of publications before congresses, did not really trigger the same volume of digital activity. It was very, very strongly correlated with the data presented at congresses and the digital Act. The peaks in the digital activity followed the peaks and drops in the you know, quantities or contributions at congresses.

Garth Sundem 02:39

Okay, so in Medical Affairs, we like to have impact. We also like to demonstrate impact. That has been such a huge theme for us at MAPS lately. And you know, pre launch scientific activity seems to be a way to do both of those things. Tim, why? Why Congresses I mean. I’m thinking put the study in any, any JAMA and there’s your impact. I mean that that as well. But why? Why congresses?

Tim Hylan  03:10

No Garth, this is, this is really critical in in Medical Affairs. We’ve, we’ve all had experiences, you know, at congresses. And to me, congresses, you know, really represent that marketplace for an exchange of ideas, that opportunity for us to, you know, have that human interaction. I mean, we all remember, you know, during the pandemic, days when we had to really rethink our participation in congresses and how we could do that virtually. But you know, that virtual experience, or that, you know, one way perspective of just say, reading a publication or reading something is not quite the same as the in person experience that offers you that opportunity for for two way dialog with your peers, so Congress’s and the ability to engage with peers and scientists And researchers about content and data offers an experience that’s not really the same when you think about like shopping or watching a sporting event. It’s very different going in person versus when you’re just at home, observing it on TV or on the having that experience on the computer. And so the congresses represent that opportunity for us to engage with our peers, to learn from each other, and at the same time, congresses we’re experiencing to have to reach individuals, when, where and how they want to engage. So it’s not only the in person experience, but offering opportunities to engage with the content you know, even afterwards. So Congress is really represent an opportunity for us to engage and have that human experience in person and

Garth Sundem 04:49

Nish and Tim. Do you see Congress as becoming more important as our use and experience of. Internals changes. You know that? I mean, so we’ve got pre pub, we’ve got we’ve got congresses, we’ve got digital channels, we have many ways to get this information. It’s not just publications anymore. Do you see the change in our use of publications resulting in the prioritization of Congresses?

Tim Hylan  05:23

Yes, I think that Congress is we have to really think of the congresses as one way and one part of, I guess what we’re terming now that, you know, Omni channel, or multi channel, ways of engaging with our peers and with our, you know, medical customers and stakeholders, and so there’s, in the past, we’ve had this, you know, belief for this experience where we go, and it’s a very traditional we have the Congress, we have the publication, as you say. But now we have to everything is happening with such greater rapidity that we have to think about this in a much more holistic framework, and oftentimes they may be co occurring, so that the speed at which information is able to be shared really is causing us to think about this in a much more holistic way,

Garth Sundem 06:14

Okay, the speed of the information we have a volunteer, Renu, if you’re listening, I’ve brought this up before. Her phrase is that the pub is the hub and everything flows from there. Do you both dare to disagree with Renu? Is the Congress now the hub, or is the pub still the hub and the Congress is one of the ways to maximize the impact of the publication even before the publication comes out. Ooh, let’s get controversial. What do you think? Sorry…

Nish Kumar 06:52

No, no, sorry too. I was just, I was just saying the I don’t think the the pub is the hub is going anywhere like the publications are obviously a necessary part of, you know, the activities that need to take place pre launch. But I think, as Tim alluded to, it takes a long time to get through the publication process, the review process before the data is actually, you know, in a peer reviewed journal. And because of the rapidity at which the science is progressing, Congress is a way to leverage and amplify the impact of the evidence that you’re trying to get in the publications. Okay,

Garth Sundem 07:32

okay, well, let’s talk about so then we we have the Congress, which is maybe another kind of hub. How do we maximize the impact of the Congress? You know, you present it, and that’s an ephemeral thing, you know? It happens at a point in time, and then it’s over. How do we maximize the impact of that Congress?

Tim Hylan  08:01

Well, we’ll see oftentimes, with the events at Congress, is the content does have some in, you know, enduring opportunities to be shared. You know, post the meeting, Congress is often make content available to the attendees or to the registrants in some form or fashion for a period of time. You know, after that, and increasingly, to individuals take that information and when and where appropriate, are able to share information through their own channels, you know. So that’s, that’s another element that now, with the, you know, the advent of a lot of digital channels, that’s a it’s an avenue that I know certainly when I was tripping out of Medical Affairs, we didn’t have that. We had the Congress event, the publication, and these other opportunities that digital channels now affords, offers additional ways to communicate content when appropriate, right?

Garth Sundem 09:00

And I was going to these digital opinion leaders. You know, are these people at the congresses? And we’re hoping to create some sort of immediate, visceral, if you want to say experience for them at the Congress that encourages them to then share widely. Are these digital opinion leaders than people who are watching these congresses from afar, and we’re trying to leverage them to share through their channels. How do we how do we use, I don’t want to say use. How do we work with digital opinion leaders in the context of Congresses?

Tim Hylan  09:39

For me, the opportunities now are such that democratization, or what I call the democratization of content, enables all of us to be able to share information, when, where, and how we would like to and how we believe that those that are, I guess, following us on. Various media channels want to receive the information, so we’re all able to do this. And what we see oftentimes is that, to answer your question, there’s probably some a mix of both. There’s people that have attended that Congress that want to share that content with their you know, other individuals, their peers, and then those may pick up in a secondary way, that information and want to, you know, re share it. So what I’ve seen is that the democratization of content and the ability to share it has created a whole, you know, host of individuals, some of which, you know, are, you know, have large following, some that have a smaller network, but look, we’re all looking for information from the most credible source in the shortest amount of time, and that is something that we look at. And not just in consuming information about medicines or about products and medicines and vaccines, but also even just in our lives, looking for information. We want that information in the in the shortest amount of time from the most trusted source. Okay,

Garth Sundem 11:11

Well, so the landscape is changing, and Nish we see this Viva pulse report showing opportunity. You know, especially in congresses, Medical Affairs has gone about things in a certain way. But what do you think Medical Affairs can do differently to capitalize on the opportunity that this report shows?

Nish Kumar 11:37

So I think one of the things is, obviously there is a desire for people to have access to this content and share it with their followers, for example, to add their own perspectives and opinions on the data and discuss with their peers. But I think one of the key opportunities is also tapping into understanding. What are the areas that amongst these discussions, experts are actually excited about the data, or what are the areas that people are skeptical about? Because these are really surfacing some really interesting aspects of how data is resonating amongst the clinical and scientific community, and that really, I think, helps to provide some really valuable insights to tailor what are the areas that need to be addressed. It’s one thing presenting the data, but it’s another thing understanding how that data is resonating.

Garth Sundem  12:37

To add on to that. What occurs to me, too is the ability to through, be it digital opinion leaders or through others activating post the Congress that allows the conversation to continue. You know, we’re all used to sort of being in the the session at the Congress or at the poster exhibit and having a conversation there, but that’s just a point in time. But, you know, continuing that conversation in other channels post Congress allows for that ongoing conversation and contextualization of the content and sharing perspectives on what the implications of it might be, and somehow to humanize the data is that important? I mean, I’m imagining, you know, we’re trying to make data driven decisions. We’re trying to, I don’t know omni channel or digital has the potential to be somewhat impersonal. Does Is there a use in human to human communication of data. Sorry, that might be a strange question, but is there, is there a role for humans talking to humans at congresses?

Tim Hylan  13:49

Oh, absolutely, you know, I’ve, I’ve, you know, for many years. You know, here this phrase, when I’m being data driven, I think it’s very important to be what I would say, data informed and human inspired, meaning that we need to be informed about data and information, and at the same time recognize that as humans, we’re inspired by individuals that we know and trust, and that element comes from engaging with others and building up that trust and credibility with individuals. And so when we see content come across our, you know, various feeds, we’re looking for information and content and contextualization of it from individuals that we know and trust, and we’re inspired by that conversation.

Garth Sundem 14:34

You know, that’s interesting. The that connection is part of the Medical Affairs skill set. It’s not necessarily part of, say, an R and D skill set. I mean, I’m not saying that there aren’t engaging people in R and D, but you know, it is part of the Medical Affairs skill set to go out and engage with people in a personal way. Does. This imply that a certain kind of Medical Affairs person should be at these congresses, having these conversations. You know, it’s not just presenting the data. It’s engaging with people in a certain way. And is that part of this 40% increased treatment, adoption opportunity that this report shows is, is Medical Affairs engaging in a human way at Congress’s

Tim Hylan  15:33

Yes, I think you have to really think about not just the data, but also how you engage around the data. Okay, because looking at the data on the poster or in the publication or on the screen is it is what it is, but it’s what we do with that information, how we make decisions, how you know, our peers and our customers look at these data and the critical part of a Medical Affairs role, be it, you know, in the field, certainly in the area that I work in, is about connecting with others and building that trust and credibility with them to have those scientific conversations appropriately.

Garth Sundem 16:16

Okay, that’s interesting. Well, we are at time. I think that you know what I wanted to get at with this conversation is not only the fact that congresses are identified as an activity leading to higher success in treatment adoption, but why that is. And I think that you know Medical Affairs engaging in person with people at congresses is, is a really interesting opportunity and something that we do uniquely All right, and we’ll link to the report from the podcast here as well so you can read more. So thanks Tim and Nish for joining us to learn more about how your organization can partner with viva. Visit viva.com maps members, don’t forget to subscribe. And we hope you enjoyed this episode of the Medical Affairs professional society podcast series. Elevate.

Hi folks. This is where the podcast ends, but we happened to go on with the record button, chatting with Tim about his path from HEOR into Medical Affairs, and it’s an interesting conversation. Please feel free to keep listening if you want. But the podcast is technically over.

Hey, Tim, I might your role. I saw, I saw your economics PhD from from Penn State. Are you leading MSLs?

Tim Hylan  17:44

Yeah. So I lead a group about 60 field medical colleagues in internal medicine, so I have responsibilities for our field medical group within cardiovascular, metabolic and migraine.

Garth Sundem 17:59

Oh, I thought you were doing HEOR?

Tim Hylan  18:04

Okay, well, I used to do HEOR back in the late 90s. I was the Global Health Economist for Prozac, and I started in 1999 at Pfizer in the field medical organization. And actually the reason why I kind of made the move from h u r to the MSL role was that I often found myself when I was presenting at Congress. Is, I mean, that was my first opportunity to to engage in congresses. And I remember to the to the day, almost where I was invited for my first Congress experience. It was a nice in France, which was kind of probably a first, his first opportunity for me. And I was invited to present my content at a poster session, and also engage in a Advisory Board, internal, you know, an advisory board with other, with psychiatrists. And I found that I had to, really, you know, first provide a, almost a presentation or grounding of the clinical profile of antidepressants and the disease state and the pathophysiology within depression, before I could then get into my information about the cost consequences and the economic models around antidepressant use and clinical practice. And so I was finding that a lot of what I needed to have a grounding in and understanding of and knowledge of was the clinical pathway, and like I said, the pathophysiology of the disease state and the HDR piece was in the context of all of that. And so what I really found exciting was the opportunity to engage and work with, in this case, MSLs, that really had that first and foremost, rounding in the in the clinical experience and engaging in that, because the he or is an important component of that, but the foundation of it was the clinical understanding of the disease state and how the products are used to to address the unmet medical need. Is there?

Garth Sundem 20:00

Oh, man, and you’re there. You are contextualizing the disease state and the product. Yes, my gosh, I’m in MSL. Cool. Well, you know, at some point we should do another one of these and really just dig in on what is the value proposition of an MSL, HCP or Kol interaction, but that’s that’s for, that’s for another day, alright? Contextualization,

Tim Hylan  20:27

because, like I said, the a lot of the content has, it’s commoditized in a way, and so it actually takes me longer to set up a zoom or a WebEx or a teams meeting with you to tell you about the information, whereas you could go online, find it, read it, and form a belief about it. So that’s, you know, that’s a it’s a major disruptor. You could sort of look at as a disrupter, but at the same time, I’ve looked at it as an opportunity to reflect on what is that unique value proposition that we provide is contextualizing that that information and putting it into the broader framework of the disease state, because the in the information is a piece of content or data, but that’s not the only piece of information in a broader decision. You think a lot of the clinical decisions that we have, that our customers are making. It’s not driven based on one piece of data. It’s that, maybe that study, that poster, but it’s their clinical experience to date. There’s a lot of other factors that go into the decision making. So I really thought a lot about how individuals make decisions, what kind of information they use, what sources they rely upon. And so it’s fascinating. And this maybe picks up on my economics background, this idea of decision making, what drives decision making is more critical than ever, and not that you’re bringing in the understanding pre packaged that you’re going to deliver to your HCP, but you can bring in the decision making methodology. Maybe, you know here, here’s, here’s the decision making landscape, here’s how to contextualize this new information within the decision making landscape. And you know, you’re still free to come to your own decisions. But, you know, here’s how, as an MSL, you would understand the information landscape behind these decisions.

Garth Sundem

It’s not that you’re telling an HCP what to think, right?

Tim Hylan  22:33

No, you can’t. Most of our opportunities are actually about the listening piece. I mean, there’s a quote I saw, I think it was from the Dalai Lama that said somebody the effect of, when you speak, you’re just saying something that you already know, but when you listen, you may learn something new. And I we try to have our field medical colleagues do more of the listening when they’re in their engagements with with HCPs and other customers.