1<!DOCTYPE html>
2
3Anonymous
4/bestp
5/bestp/domrep.nsf
62D3129BCB442D6470025871E00455570
8
9
10
11
12
13
140
15
16
17/bestp/domrep.nsf/products/leveraging-outcomes-data-operational-roles-health-economics-outcomes-research-oncology-products
18
19
203.239.58.199
21
22
23www.best-in-class.com
24/bestp/domrep.nsf
25BMR




Products & Services Medical Affairs Health Outcomes

Leveraging Outcomes Data - Operational Roles in Health Economics & Outcomes Research in Oncology Products

ID: POP-338


Features:

13 Info Graphics

40 Data Graphics

910+ Metrics

3 Narratives


Pages: 65


Published: 2021


Delivery Format: Shipped


 

License Options:


Buy Now

 

919-403-0251

  • STUDY OVERVIEW
  • BENCHMARK CLASS
  • STUDY SNAPSHOT
  • KEY FINDINGS
  • VIEW TOC AND LIST OF EXHIBITS
To gain market access and market share in the oncology marketplace, it is important for biopharma manufacturers to demonstrate the oncology drug’s value proposition and its potential based on real-world clinical practice. And as a key player in generating value-oriented outcomes data, the Health Economics Outcomes Research function must be optimized to drive clinical and business success.

Best Practices, LLC conducted this benchmarking study to identify how leading oncology manufacturers develop highly successful Health Outcomes groups. This report examines specific ways that the HEOR function can drive decision-making and deliver top value across medical activities.

This critical report also highlights proven strategies used for effective health outcomes data communication and utilization, stakeholder collaboration, and launch investment timelines for new therapies. Finally, the report also probes the critical advantages of - and top challenges for - a successful HEOR program.

Industries Profiled:
Pharmaceutical; Laboratories; Manufacturing; Biotech; Consumer Products; Diagnostic; Medical Device; Health Care; Communications; Biopharmaceutical


Companies Profiled:
AbbVie; Alkem; Astellas; Bayer; Boehringer Ingelheim; Brii Biosciences; Daiichi Sankyo; Eisai; Foundation Medicine; Ipsen; Karyopharm Therapeutics; Merck; Merck Sharp & Dohme; Novartis; Nucleus Global; Pfizer; Seattle Genetics; Sun Pharmaceutical; Takeda Pharmaceuticals

Study Snapshot

Best Practices, LLC engaged 27 medical leaders from 19 leading life sciences companies manufacturing oncology products through a benchmarking survey instrument. The study insights are mostly from directors and higher management executives - representing 78% of the benchmark participants. Research insights are further segmented into two areas: Geographic responsibility and HEOR reporting structure.

Key topics covered in this report include:

  • HEOR involvement and its effectiveness in delivering value
  • Health outcomes data usage and its effectiveness
  • Role of HEOR in oncology health outcomes activities and data collection
  • KPIs to measure success of HEOR
  • Technology and tools used to demonstrate value
  • Challenges and success factors in working with payers for oncology products

Key Findings

Select key insights uncovered from this report are noted below. Detailed findings are available in the full report.

  • Structure & Staffing: HEOR resides within Market Access or Medical Affairs though validation of HEOR strategy may require collaboration across several functions.
  • Training & KPIs: Expanding HEOR roles to support drug development and research collection require training on a quarterly and semi-annually basis. Effective HEOR programs measure impact via KPIs. However, nearly half of companies do not track RWD and neither intend to in the future.

Table of Contents

Sr. No.
Topic
Slide No.
I.
Executive Summaryp. 4-7
Research Objectives & Methodologyp. 5
Participating Companies & Titlesp. 6
Segmentation Criteriap. 7
II.
HEOR Structure, Collaboration and Involvementp. 8-27
III.
Launch Investment for HEOR Activitiesp. 28-33
IV.
Technology and Toolsp. 34-40
V.
Training and KPIs Measurementp. 41-45
VI.
HEOR Staffing and Leadershipp. 46-50
VII.
Lessons Learned, Success Factors and Pitfallsp. 51-54
VIII.
Participant Demographicsp. 55-57
IX.
Appendixp. 58-64
X.
About Best Practices, LLCp. 65

    List of Charts & Exhibits

    I. HEOR Structure, Collaboration and Involvement

    • Structure of Health Economics and Outcomes Research (HEOR) group within the organization
    • Structure of Health Economics and Outcomes Research (HEOR) group within the organization – Global vs. U.S. Only
    • Internal stakeholder collaboration
    • Internal HEOR collaboration – Global vs. U.S. Only
    • HEOR involvement vs. effectiveness for value delivery
    • Effectiveness of HEOR function at delivering value – Global vs. U.S. Only
    • Effectiveness of HEOR function at delivering value – Market Access vs. Medical Affairs
    • Highly effective HEOR functions for delivering value
    • Health outcomes data usage vs. effectiveness
    • Utilization of listed types of health outcomes activities by the HEOR function – Global vs. U.S. Only
    • Utilization of listed types of health outcomes activities by the HEOR function – Market Access vs. Medical Affairs
    • HEOR involvement level in each of the listed activities
    • Sharing of medical information with various groups
    • Sharing of medical information with various groups – Global vs. U.S. Only
    • Organization’s role in health outcomes data collection
    • Preferred frequency of communications (at a country & region level) with internal staff
    • Preferred frequency of communications (at a country & region level) with internal staff – Global vs. U.S. Only
    • Preferred frequency of communications (at a country & region level) with internal staff – Market Access vs. Medical Affairs
    • Roles played by HEOR team in carrying out activities designed to probe (payers) stakeholders’ needs and perspectives

    II. Launch Investment for HEOR Activities

    • Point at which investment is started and point at which maximum investment is reached in the listed HEOR activities to develop value assessments for new therapies
    • Point at which investment is started and point at which maximum investment is reached in the listed HEOR activities to develop value assessments for new therapies - Global
    • Point at which investment is started and point at which maximum investment is reached in the listed HEOR activities to develop value assessments for new therapies - Market Access
    • Launch investment timeline in HEOR activities - Large companies
    • Launch investment timeline in HEOR activities - Small/Mid-sized companies

    III. Technology and Tools

    • Effective technologies for field communication
    • Highly effective technologies for field communication – Global vs. U.S. Only
    • Highly effective technologies for field communication – Market Access vs. Medical Affairs
    • Frequency of technology update
    • Frequency of updating effective technologies to enable field communication tools
    • Tools used by HEOR group to demonstrate value/ communicate with payers

    IV. Training and KPIs Measurement

    • Effective training and development programs for HEOR groups
    • Effective training and development programs for HEOR groups – Global vs. U.S. Only
    • Frequency of training provided to Health Outcomes groups
    • Most effective KPIs and metrics to measure the success of real world data program

    V. HEOR Staffing and Leadership

    • Number of field staff that work in the HEOR organization and number of field-based staff dedicated to HEOR structure
    • Number of field staff that work in the HEOR organization and number of field-based staff dedicated to HEOR structure – Global vs. U.S. Only
    • Number of field staff that work in the HEOR organization and number of field-based staff dedicated to HEOR structure – Market Access vs. Medical Affairs
    • Leadership level of the HEOR group

    VI. Lessons Learned, Success Factors and Pitfalls

    • Top advantages to pursuing HEOR planning earlier in the R&D cycle
    • Top success factors for HEOR in developing and maintaining strong capabilities for work with payer groups
    • Topmost difficult challenges / pitfalls for HEOR in developing and maintaining strong capabilities for work with payer groups

    VII. Participant Demographics

    • Geographic span of HEOR responsibility within participating companies
    • Job titles of benchmark partners