Large global qualitative study leads to a refinement of the demand forecast

Background

The brand team at a leading biotechnology company sought guidance on the global commercial potential of its late-stage product for prophylaxing RSV in infants. We had 8 weeks to conduct 86 exploratory in-depth interviews across the U.S., Canada, the E.U., and Japan with clinicians, KOLs, P&T members and payers.

Analysis

There were four central issues we explored to assess their estimated impact on the product’s overall commercial potential

* What would be prescribers’ attitudes and behaviors toward using Product X with various primary efficacy claims (i.e., superiority and non-inferiority) relative to the current products available?
* How would U.S. payers likely cover and restrict Product X’s use relative to the current products?
* What would be the consequences of various secondary claims on Product X’s penetration, utilization rates and perceived value?
* What would be the relative impact of Product X not demonstrating an efficacy benefit in a higher-risk patient population that was previously covered by the preceding product?

Solution

We concluded that Product X would largely be received as a substitutable product for the current offering and estimated utilization would likely not increase above current market share. We learned that local, regional and national guideline and P&T committees would strongly govern the use of Product X relative to its pharmacoeconomic benefit. This issue would be the highest hurdle for the brand team to overcome. Finally, we recommended that the brand team pursue an efficacy trial in the higher-risk patient population to avoid losing an estimated 5-10% of projected revenues.

Result

Six months later, the client commissioned bioStrategies to conduct a quantitative study to refine the potential impact lacking an efficacy study in the higher-risk patient population would have on their demand forecast.