eyeforpharma Barcelona 2015 day three summary

eyeforpharma Barcelona 2015 day three summary – Thursday 26th March 2015

 

13.10 CET

That’s it folks for this year. Thanks to eyeforpharma for all their hard work in running the event and enormous thanks to IMS Heath for supporting our live blogging and tweeting (more information about them available by clicking on the banners on this page). All the archived feeds from each day can be perused at your leisure on the hub page:
https://pharmaphorum.com/articles/eyeforpharma-barcelona-2015-hub
Please get in touch if you have any questions, observations or general feedback via the contact form or on Twitter.
Finally – thanks for reading / following remotely and do flag to others who may find it interesting. We’re hoping to do more of this for other events, sponsors willing!

________________________________________

13.04 CET

In closing, the patients are invited to provide some final commentary and the mood is positive – what is stopping the dialogue between patients and the industry that has taken place here happening in the real world every day. Nothing – so go do it.

________________________________________

13.02 CET

Beal is also speaking to other ‘Patient Officers’ and they are building a consortium that will work with patient organisations collaboratively to drive solutions where they can all win. Good to hear!

________________________________________

12.54 CET

Beal sees adherence, patient solutions and integrated solutions around outcomes as focus areas from a patient-centric perspective, although notes these are terms that are not meaningful to patients themselves. Finally, she sees driving culture shift as a pivotal part of her role, which necessitates communicating the need for change, before outlining a clear plan, communicating effectively internally and sharing success – some themes we have already seen mentioned around the changes occurring with multichannel marketing.

________________________________________

12.49 CET

Beal sees a mix of information sources for being patient-centric, with variable granularity and generalisability.

________________________________________

12.48 CET

Beal sees three steps to be patient-centric, through patient focus, then patient engagement and then patient empowerment – “not only granting patients the opportunity to get involved but giving them a seat at the table”. She stresses that the industry needs to be rigorous about the terms it uses and what they mean.

________________________________________

12.43 CET

Beal sees three pillars to patient-centricity in practice: input and understanding, solutions and outcomes, culture and community – all of which revolve around helping the patient take / regain control of their life and condition.

________________________________________

12.38 CET

Beal: “patients are people who are living with a condition, but they are not defined by it”. Yes, yes, yes.

________________________________________

12.37 CET

Beal’s energy at the end of a 2 1/2 day event is infectious – she sounds like she will make a positive impact for Sanofi and the patients it serves!

________________________________________

12.35 CET

Beal’s personal goal is to make Sanofi so patient-centric that her role becomes redundant. Her core values for patient-centeredness revolve around transparency, partnership, continuous learning and improvement and a focus on outcomes and impact, but she notes we are all learning – “there are no experts on patient-centricity” – so she does not know exactly what good patient-centricity looks like for pharma…yet.

________________________________________

12.32 CET

The patient-centricity journey, as Beal sees it (sorry slightly fuzzy – the far right box says ‘where next?’

________________________________________

12.29 CET

Mike Young @elgringoinspain tweets:
Yes! Patients can be fully involved with R & D – We are the research #e4pbarca

________________________________________

12.28 CET

Beal: came into Sanofi with a blank slate, including defining her own job. She believes that patient-centricity is not a new concept but started with ‘patient and family centred care’ in the US 40 years ago. One observation that has come from this is that involved patients are more satisfied patients (something I have also heard from discussions with UK patients), which brings all kinds of benefits to them and the healthcare system.

________________________________________

12.26 CET

Beal: PCORI wanted patients to have an active seat at the table and involved them in research. She found that in the middle of all the complex research patients would often ask the all-important ‘so what?’ questions and bring a fresh perspective on the interpretation of the results.

________________________________________

12.24 CET

And the final speaker – Anne Beal, (relatively new) Chief Patient Officer for Sanofi, who joined pharma from the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) in the US, so not from within the industry.

________________________________________

12.21 CET

Closing discussion with the payer panel highlights to me a communication gap – beyond the pill seen by the payers as nice for patients and therefore ‘nice to have’ for payers, but without clear benefit for healthcare systems. It stresses the need to demonstrate financial benefit for these healthcare systems in all such solutions, in order to get payer support.

________________________________________

12.20 CET

Dr. Pénzes János @drpenzesjanos
Payers seem to fear experimentation too, not just Pharma. Time for disruption coming from outside? #e4pbarca

________________________________________

12.20 CET

Nigel Campbell @nigelccampbell tweets:
Unless we can agree who funds it, “beyond the pill” remains a buzzword #e4pbarca

________________________________________

12.15 CET

What is the future, from a payer perspective? More data sharing which allows better evaluation (and for all treatments, not just individual ones), everyone sharing responsibility for managing budgets and this vision of integrated healthcare. How can we get there / will they pay for it? Bringing in more experience from outside healthcare, with new ideas, but every new initiative requires cutting an old one – too many patient-centric beyond the pill solutions seen as ‘nice to have’ rather than essential.

________________________________________

12.11 CET

The panel is trying to get to grips with ‘integrated healthcare’ and what it looks like / who should be involved – no clear consensus emerging. Sarria-Santemera is talking about the broad role of ‘primary care’ in dealing with the big chronic conditions, which raises a question. Do traditional structures around primary / specialty care pose barriers to integrated healthcare – and pharma’s involvement – when patients often spend time in both settings irrespective of their specific condition?

________________________________________

12.07 CET

Anne Beal @acbeal tweets:
Discussing the role of pharma in prevention. If patient programs focus on a condition, why not extend back to prevention? #e4pbarca

________________________________________

12.03 CET

Parow: also sees big opportunities in prevention, e.g. initiative in Germany where people at risk of diabetes are enrolled in a one year programme to help prevent them developing the disease. But prevention necessitates a genuine beyond the pill view for pharma companies (and different commercial model) as it is otherwise steering away from the current financial model as the net result = less need for medicines (my thoughts, sorry to not have the answer and do want to see pharma involved in prevention!).

________________________________________

11.59 CET

Parow: echoes some of the comments made in the last panel – in Germany they are building support programmes that involve multiple companies. He has concerns that, otherwise, patient-centricity just becomes an extension of marketing, if done by individual companies in isolation.

________________________________________

11.57 CET

Sarria-Santamera: realised early on that dealing with chronic conditions required a different approach, including courses on health education to help doctors better engage with patients. He also saw the need to educate doctors on the bigger picture, so they understood that whatever resources they provided to the individual patient sat in front of them meant that resources would need to be withheld from other patients. This is the essence of the difficult decisions that payers have to make and interesting to hear about how Spain is trying to disseminate this down to the doctors.

________________________________________

11.50 CET

Schael: patient organisations often want free choice on how they use healthcare services and products, but this is not compatible with the restricted budgets available within the system. This means they have to look at what is ‘essential’ and what is peripheral / ‘nice to have’. The sad reality is that no health system has a bottomless pit of money.

________________________________________

11.45 CET

The Payers panel is up next, chaired by Leo Pharma’s Peter Aksel Villadsen (Head of global centre of excellence – patient engagement) and bringing toegther Thomas Schael, Senior health care management expert (IRES Piemonte), Dr Antonio Sarria-Santamera, Director Spanish HTA (AETS) and Detlev Parow, Head of dept of care management development (DAK Gesundheit).
Focus for this session is how payers view patient care/value.
Debate starts with a view that healthcare is a local service.

________________________________________

11.39 CET

Audience question: should pharma only be delivering collaborative ‘beyond the pill’ solutions rather than in isolation. Del Valle believes Uber style disruption could be coming to the industry and will really drive disruptive innovation – but Goldman sees some key differences with respect to the necessity for very high quality data sharing within healthcare.

________________________________________

11.38 CET

Anne Beal @acbeal
Discussing Uber and AirBNB as sharing based economic models that pharma could replicate– starting w data #e4pbarca

________________________________________

11.33 CET

Alan Thomas (patient) challenges the industry to be transparent right at the start about what they are planning / design of trials and provide more information. Barlow does see this starting to happen, but on the education side Del Valle sees some challenges with modern repositories such as Wikipedia, which are not always easy for patients to engage with. There needs to be collaboration across all parties around providing very simple, easy to digest information, he adds.

________________________________________

11.30 CET

James: the importance of real-world evidence will continue to grow versus clinical data. I agree – in the future I believe clinical trials will focus more on just proving safety for approval, and real-world outcomes data will then be used on an ongoing basis to assess value and determine whether interventions should be used / what should be paid for them.

________________________________________

11.25 CET

A member of the audience reminds the panel that patients need to be included in any collaboration / open innovation as early as possible.

________________________________________

11.22 CET

Len Starnes @lenstarnes tweets:
#e4pbarca disruptive innovation panel: prof Barlow> regulators demanding far 2 much evidence supporting eHealth innovations

________________________________________

11.22 CET

Barlow presents a slightly more cautious view – he sees a lack of willingness to try new things within healthcare (industry and providers) and a constant need for ‘more evidence’ before changing course when, inherently at the start of change such evidence is not available. Del Valle brings it back to digital disruption and sees start-ups with ‘digital therapies’ really changing the status quo, plus that the regulators are starting to embrace this. The recent change of stance by the FDA towards 23andMe is, IMO, an example of this, plus we are starting to see apps being regulated.

________________________________________

11.21 CET

Len Starnes @lenstarnes
#e4pbarca disruptive innovation panel: prof Barlow> regulators demanding far 2 much evidence supporting eHealth innovations

________________________________________

11.18 CET

Goldman: lots of conversation externally about open innovation, but lots of fear when you talk internally. However, he sees a willingness at the very top level to make this happen, which is encouraging.

________________________________________

11.16 CET

Goldman says that clinical trials will change dramatically in the years to come, and goes on to elaborate on one example of collaboration. In schizophrenia, five different companies shared all their clinical data and in doing so reduced the number of patients required for the trial by 40%. Pretty compelling.

________________________________________

11.13 CET

Barlow: collaboration around research is relatively simple compared to collaboration in other areas, e.g. around payers etc. The process of moving beyond the pill is ‘relatively opaque’ in reality. James throws in an argument for increased patent protection to encourage the industry to do more, referencing 50 years protection for songwriters but only 20 for drug manufacturers. Now there’s a whole different, bigger issue!

________________________________________

11.10 CET

Jill Donahue @jillengagerx tweets:
Do u use the word competition in #pharma? Let’s compete to serve patients not compete for scripts #e4pbarca

________________________________________

11.08 CET

Simms invites Goldman to comment on developing ‘non-traditional’ partnerships with potential competitors. Goldman sees a lot to learn from other industries, e.g. the automotive industry where collaboration has increased efficiency, but the pharma industry needs more incentives to promote collaboration, as current systems encourage competitive, not collaborative behaviour. Del Valle adds that a ‘networking revolution’ is required around how pharma companies share data – this is advancing but needs to accelerate.

________________________________________

11.04 CET

James: sees a number of reasons why the pace of pharma change will be relatively slow, but will be hurried along by external pressure, e.g. the announcement around Apple moving into clinical trials, which will drive step change. Simms asks Del Valle (while acknowledging Bayer is probably an exception) to comment on whether pharma is really engaging with other commercial companies, beyond its own walls. Del Valle: we need to create an open innovation channel, involving people who are not bound by the constraints of our own enterprise – he mentions that Bayer is doing this already – and sees the need for more of a ‘community’ driving innovation, with pharma involved. Del Valle adds that Bayer is supporting healthcare start-ups by coaching and mentoring, so perhaps we are starting to see the pharma partnership model extend beyond traditional research collaboration.

________________________________________

10.59 CET

Barlow: moving away from high-cost healthcare is going to dominate the landscape, with clear implications for pharma. He sees the need to build integrated services around the patient – not changing is not an option and he thinks we need to move quicker. Goldman: the question is how quick we can change – he sees the drug companies as ‘losing their monopoly’ on healthcare, with tech and device companies starting to play a much more active role. In his view, pharma has to accept that uncertainty is part of daily business – risks are there and must be managed, but cannot be avoided.

________________________________________

10.53 CET

Right – here we go with the final session of this year’s eyeforpharma Barcelona. All back in the main hall to hear a panel discussion on ‘disruptive innovation without disrupting patients’, chaired by eyeforpharma’s Paul Simms, joined by Jesus del Valle (Bayer Healthcare), Ceri James (McCann Complete Medical), Michel Goldman (IMI) and Prof. James Barlow (Imperial College Business School).

________________________________________

10.18 CET

And so to the final coffee break of this year’s event – back circa 10:45 CET as we head towards the finish line.

________________________________________

10.18 CET

A question around the impact of comorbidities coming out of the DAWN2 study. Skovlund: this has not been a major focus of DAWN2, but work needs to be done with academic institutions etc. to do registry research and start to connect up with other disease areas (comorbidities), adds Villadsen from LEO Pharma.

________________________________________

10.12 CET

A question is asked around the commercial benefit of this new patient-centric approach. The answer: we probably don’t know at this stage, but really important to understand the patient better. IMO there are clear commercial benefits – better market understanding = better products / implementation of product value in the real world, and better connectivity / reputation with key influencers, which is vital when access to these individuals is very hard for the pharma industry. Seems to offer a win-win-win for the industry, healthcare providers and patients I think.

________________________________________

10.08 CET

Skovlund asked why pharma should be leading this kind of collaboration. He responds by saying that the industry must do what it can, but is also happy to step back as others take more of a lead in particular areas, they are clearly not looking to ‘own’ this. The point is made that new types of partnerships are evolving (as also referenced by Sir Michael Hirst earlier) that can collectively have more chance of shaping policy in the right direction.

________________________________________

10.03 CET

Skovlund: discrimination due to diabetes is also a problem – one lady quoted as being ‘treated like a drug user’ when she went to the bathroom in a restaurant to inject her insulin. So anxiety / fear and discrimination are challenges for people with diabetes, but with the right support network these can be addressed. Great to see a pharma presentation around a particular disease where I don’t think the word ‘brand’ has been mentioned even once; the focus here is very firmly on helping to establish a collaborative network of support around the patient.

________________________________________

9.59 CET

Skovlund: Within Novo Nordisk’s DAWN2 study they are asking people with diabetes how it is impacting their lives – with scope for both negative and positive responses, and patients are coming back to say it does positively influence some aspects of their life! He believes that it is really important for physicians and carers to really try to connect with their patients in a positive way – the concept of collaborative treatment / treating the person and not the disease.

________________________________________

9.56 CET

Skovlund: two out of every five people with diabetes have emotional distress due to their condition (Harvard study), but this figure varies significantly by country. There is a mismatch between doctors and patients as 24% of people with diabetes recall their HCP asking them about their lives, whereas 52% of HCPs claim to be asking – a clear communication gap.

________________________________________

9.53 CET

Switching to the patient engagement track to hear Soren Skovlund (Novo Nordisk) talk about the first step to patient-centricity: truer, deeper understanding. He starts by talking about the broader societal challenges of diabetes – the burden goes way beyond the patient and there are significant challenges that necessitate being very close to the patients.

________________________________________

9.49 CET

Helen Adams @weenell tweets:
#e4pbarca will compliance be an issue with virtual conference? In short no!

________________________________________

9.47 CET

Question around patient involvement in medical congresses. Starnes: did not cover this on purpose as it is a much bigger discussion – enormous opportunity for patients / patient organisations to get involved. He mentions Andrew Spong’s initiative to rank all medical congresses on ‘patient inclusivity’.

________________________________________

9.44 CET

Starnes concludes by pre-empting compliance pushback and stresses there are ways to do all these virtual activities in a compliant way (ensuring only doctors can attend). He sees a real need for pharma industry leaders to talk with congress leaders and together find the solutions – something needs to change on both sides.

________________________________________

9.42 CET

And Starnes on the future of virtual symposia:

________________________________________

9.41 CET

Starnes on the future of complementary virtual booths:

________________________________________

9.39 CET

Starnes goes on: ESC rented stand space is down almost 30% from 2009 – data which came from the ESC website, but he was asked to then delete ‘from the web’! But there is a way forward with a new virtual congress model, Starnes believes. He sees a hybrid exhibition stand concept, with much smaller physical booths complemented by virtual booths. Likewise, the sponsored symposia concept needs to adapt, with less didactic presentation and more open, collaborative discussion, again complemented by digital virtual symposia.

________________________________________

9.33 CET

However…..the congress organisers have suddenly gone very quiet on virtual congresses, Starnes notes. Why?

________________________________________

9.31 CET

Starnes talks about how ESC is trying to adapt in the cardiology space. During the 5 days of the 2014 event there were almost 25,000 physical visitors, but over 25,000 virtual visitors, the latter being up around 30% on the previous year. ESC are therefore considering developing a members only community to support this virtualisation, rather like ASCO has done with ASCO Connection, but this will take time and new expertise to build. But they have a great database, great content and considerable trust and credibility, which is a fantastic starting point.

________________________________________

9.28 CET

Starnes: the number of virtual congress attendees is already set to dwarf those attending physically – a challenge when financial viability is based more on physical.

________________________________________

9.26 CET

Starnes is presenting on the emergent hybrid medical society conference and what it will mean for pharma. He sees that digital disruption of the traditional medical congress is here now and both congresses and the pharma industry need to figure out how to change. He starts by quoting Ronan Kavanagh (a rheumatologist) in saying that he now attends most medical conferences from the comfort of his own home in his dressing gown! He, like other digital natives, expects to be involved in conferences and for them to be sharing information 365 days a year, not just a few.

________________________________________

9.22 CET

Wesley now introduces Len Starnes (Digital Healthcare Consultant) as ‘the father of digital pharma’ – a fair description!

________________________________________

9.21 CET

Dr. Pénzes János @drpenzesjanos
Pharma needs to earn their right to be there in the ongoing online conversations. #e4pbarca

________________________________________

9.20 CET

Wesley: Loved the phrase UCB used yesterday when they remarked that they need to figure out the role of the sales rep within multichannel – a switch from 10 years ago. She shows a graph which details how pharma spends 20% of marketing budget on digital channels, but physicians spend more than 90% of their learning time online rather than face to face (Manhattan Research data).

________________________________________

9.18 CET

Kay Wesley (Kanga Health) opens day 3 in the multichannel track by reminding us that we have reached a tipping point where most doctors are now digital natives and that the customer is truly in charge of what content they wish to consume. Plenty of subdued looking people this morning, so it looks like everyone enjoyed a nice Weds evening in Barcelona! 🙂

________________________________________

8.27 CET

Feed will be active from 9am CET

________________________________________