Report Summary: Patient Support Excellence: Structure, Activities and Resource Levels to Ensure Patient-Centric Products and Services

Industries Profiled:
Pharmaceutical; Biotech; Chemical; Health Care; Biopharmaceutical; Clinical Research; Laboratories


Companies Profiled:
AstraZeneca; Millenium; Roche Canada; UCB Pharma; Dr Reddy's Laboratories; Astellas; Horizon Pharma; Merck Serono; LEO Pharma; Baxter BioScience; Boehringer Ingelheim; Celgene; Nova Nordisk; Daiichi Sankyo; Merck; EMD Serono; Pfizer; GlaxoSmithKline ; Sanofi

Study Snapshot

Best Practices, LLC engaged 19 Patient Support leaders from 19 pharmaceutical companies through a benchmarking survey. Research analysts also conducted secondary research regarding different platforms that companies are using to engage with patients.

Key Findings

Patient Support Structure Varies by Company Size (Large Company Segment (LCS), Midsize Company Segment (MCS), Small Company Segment (SCS)):

Patient Support Reporting Line
43% of LCS reports to Marketing
33% of MCS reports to Commercial
50% of SCS have dedicated PS group

Patient Support Group Structure
42% of LCS is decentralized (14% centralized)
66% of MCS is decentralized
66% of SCS is centralized
• Marketing is Key Function Found within Patient Support Groups: Marketing was the only function that a majority (53%) of participants said resides within their Patient Support group. Commercial and Patient Advocacy were the second most common functions (42%).
• Brand Teams Principal Funding Source for Patient Support Programs: 47% of respondents said brand/product teams were their Patient Support programs’ principal funder. Company-wide business units were the next largest principal funder at 41%. Meanwhile, a majority said medical was not a contributor to their program.

1. Research Overview pp. 4

2. Participating Companies pp. 5

3. Key Recommendations & Findings Overview pp. 7-9

4. Detailed Key Findings pp. 66-71

· Patient Support in Pharma pp. 15-20

· Participant Demographics pp. 21-25

· Program Structure pp. 26-35

· Program Effectiveness pp. 36-42

· Staffing and Program Drivers pp. 43-46

· Program Staffing pp. 47-51

· Program Budget pp. 52-58

· Program Activities and Alliances pp. 59-65

· Detailed Key Findings pp. 66-71

· About Best Practices, LLC pp. 73

List of Charts & Exhibits

Patient Support Program Best Practices and Pitfalls to Avoid

• Patient Support Organizational Structure Type
• Patient Support Group Structural Location
• Levels of Geographic Presence by Patient Support Structure
• Job Title that Leads Patient Support
• Level that Patient Support leader reports to
• Location of Patient Support Leadership/Headquarters
• Percentage of Participants with Patient Support HQ in Same Country as Corporate HQ
• Geographical levels that exist for Participants’ Patient Support group
• Functions Represented in Patient Support groups
• Patient Support Program Overall Effectiveness
• Patient Support Reporting Structure by Effectiveness
• Levels of Geographic Organization by Effectiveness
• Organizations providing funding for Patient Support programs
• Percentage of Patients Aware of PS Activities and percentage who are engaged in Activities
• Patient Support Program Drivers
• New Patient Support Program Creation Drivers
• Patient Support Program Staffing Drivers
• Patient Support FTEs for Area of Responsibility and Globally
• Patient Support FTEs by Effectiveness
• Patient Support FTEs by Brand Responsibility
• Patient Support FTEs by Structure
• Funding Sources
• Localized Patient Support Budget
• Patient Support Budget as % of total PS Budget
• Percentage of Marketing Budget Allocated to Patient Support
• Patient Support Capital Budget
• Effectiveness of Patient Support Activities
• Effectiveness of Patient Advocacy Activities
• Effectiveness of Grant/Sponsorship Types
• Legal Department Involvement in Patient Support
• Health Outcomes Involvement
• Vendors for Patient Support initiatives and their areas of expertise