|
mass exodus of the GP population to
foreign climes. For the pharmaceutical marketeer, the period marks a time to
take stock and prepare for new campaigns ahead. Logically it would follow that
companies do not launch many new products around this time. Not this year! This
summer we have seen the launch of two innovative products for the treatment of
debilitating illnesses. Transtec (buprenorphine) from Napp launched in May and
Cipralex (escitalopram) from Lundbeck in June. For the purpose of the article
we have benchmarked both products against MSD's Arcoxia which was launched in
May 2002. Matthew Pitt of Isis Research uses Coverage and Frequency Monitor and
Launch Essential to explore how these products are faring post-launch.
 |
Napp have a well-established history in
pain management, already marketing a variety of opioids and compound
analgesics. Transtec is a transdermal therapeutic system containing
buprenorphine. Patches have been used before in a variety of therapeutic areas
with some success and now Napp have been able to combine this effective
pain-killer into a transdermal delivery system. Of note is the drugs licenced
indication that includes both malignant and chronic, severe non-malignant
pain.
Lundbeck, the CNS specialists, launched Cipralex as a follow up to
their first SSRI (Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitor) Cipramil. Cipralex
differs from Cipramil in that 'Escitalopram is the therapeutically active
component of Citalopram [and is said to] significantly improve symptoms and
quality of life.' The data from pooled studies suggests that Cipralex leads to
a greater improvement in depression symptoms over Cipramil and these
differences were more significant in those patients suffering from severe
depression.2
 |
Napp and Lundbeck are specialised
companies focusing on niche areas of the pharmaceutical industry to achieve
their growth. Their new product launches are critical to the future growth of
the respective organisations. Before we monitor the performance of these
products let's first take a look at the coverage of the companies. Coverage is
defined as the proportion of all UK GPs seen at least once by a pharmaceutical
sales rep in a given time period.
To gain some perspective of the launch
performances, we will benchmark Transtec and Cipralex against Arcoxia from
Merck Sharpe and Dohme. Benchmarking allows us to place these results in
context and evaluate the success of launch whilst taking into account the
differing resources of the three companies.
The Coverage and Frequency
monitor from Isis Research monitors field force performance by analysing the
number of sales contacts achieved along with coverage and repeat calling
ratios. In the latest MAT to June 2002 the data we see for Lundbeck and Napp
gives us some idea of the performance of their respective sales forces. If we
look at the coverage attained, we see that Lundbeck have visited 61% of GPs
whilst Napp have seen 42%.
Looking into the volume of details each
company has achieved in the MAT to June 2002, we see that Lundbeck have
generated 51,000 details. Napp in comparison realised some 30,500 These
differences are most probably attributed to Lundbeck's much larger field force.
Putting this into context, MSD achieved just under 120,000 sales contacts in
the same MAT. Their GP coverage was one of the highest in the industry with 80%
of the UK population called on at least once in the year up to June 2002.
Drawing data from Launch Essential, we see the cumulative percentage of
GPs on the Launch Essential panel that were aware of Transtec, Cipralex and
Arcoxia in the weeks following their launches.
The awareness for
Transtec started off positively with 20% aware after 4 weeks, rising to 36%
after 18 weeks. However, since then the awareness has flattened off slightly.
Cipralex has enjoyed slightly higher awareness levels in the weeks following
its launch with 52% of all panel GPs being aware of the product in just over
three months. 35% were aware in the first four weeks. When we benchmark this
data against MSD's Arcoxia four weeks post launch 46% of GPs were aware and
nearly 62% after 18 weeks.
With the reasonably high awareness that we
have seen for Transtec, Cipralex and Arcoxia we would expect to see similar
levels of GP coverage. Regarding the percentage of GPs that have been detailed
at least once on the three products on a week on week time period, the data
that we see for Transtec shows a correlation with the awareness data. After
four weeks 6% had been detailed by a sales representative, at the end of
eighteen weeks this number had risen to almost 22%. Sharp increases are seen in
the first few weeks after the launch of Cipralex. Lundbeck had reached Napp's
22% detailing figure for Transtec after only four weeks and at the end of the
eighteen weeks the sales team had reached 44%. By comparing Cipralex's
detailing activity with that of MSD's promotion of Arcoxia there is little
disparity. The percentage of GPs detailed on Arcoxia for the first time at the
end of fourteen weeks was 47% compared to Lundbeck's 44%.
The Coverage
and Frequency data coupled with the awareness and detailing figures stimulates
some interesting discussion points. For instance, with a larger field force and
marketing budget should MSD have recorded higher data for the awareness and
detailing of Arcoxia? Or is the data we are seeing testimony to the efforts of
Lundbeck and Napp in raising the profiles of their respective treatments? These
questions are of course speculative and can only really be answered by seeing
how successful each product has been in generating scripts.
With the
autumnal nights drawing in, it will prove interesting to see how our product's
fare as they are pitted against the furore of an increasing competitors' sales
call activity in the run up to Christmas. Whatever the outcome, Launch
Essential will be tracking them all the way.
Ref 1: Reference from 23rd Congress of
the Collegium Internationale Neuro-Psychopharmacologicum (CINP)
Ref 2: Dr
Jack Gorman, Columbia University College of Physicans and Surgeons, New York
speaking at the conference above
About the author
Isis
Research plc is the parent company of Isis Research, Fieldwork International
and Maxis Research. Isis Research has its global and regional headquarters in
London. Working together with our affiliated companies, Fieldwork International
and Maxis Research, we can provide our clients with all their healthcare market
research needs - from early product development through to sales force
effectiveness; fieldwork and data processing in one integrated package.
For further information on Isis Research plc,
click here.
|
