Your Cart Is Empty!
In the US non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treatment market, competition among medical affairs teams is fierce. The top team may be comfortably ahead, but the two 2nd-place contenders are running a dead heat, and four more teams are fighting it out for 3rd place.
Where does that leave your team?
Are you giving oncologists the services they want most? Are you available when and where they need you? What can you do to boost your team’s performance, and stand out from the competition?
Get the report and find out.
Not your market? Click here to see the EU report
Answering Key Questions about Medical Affairs Teams for 8 Major NSCLC Brands
Avastin (bevacizumab; Roche): Satisfaction scores for Avastin’s team lag in one key area. Which one?
Gilotrif (afatinib; Boehringer Ingelheim): Gilotrif’s overall quality score is within a point of three other teams’ scores. Which ones?
Iressa (gefitinib; AstraZeneca): Does Iressa’s team earn higher satisfaction scores for responding promptly to medical inquiries or providing relevant resources and materials?
Keytruda (pembrolizumab; Merck & Co.): In which important area does Keytruda’s team outperform two of the leading teams?
Opdivo (nivolumab; Bristol-Myers Squibb): Which team’s satisfaction scores are consistently highest; Opdivo’s, Keytruda’s, or Avastin’s?
Tarceva (erlotinib; Roche): Tarceva’s team earned a top-three satisfaction score in two key areas. Which two?
Xalkori (crizotinib; Pfizer/EMD Serono): Which team responds faster to medical inquiries; Xalkori’s, Opdivo’s, or Keytruda’s?
Zykadia (ceritinib; Novartis): Zykadia’s team earns high satisfaction scores in a few areas. But are those areas important to oncologists?
Leading team is way out front: Ranking far ahead of the rest for overall quality of interactions, despite a competing team’s higher performance scores.
Second place a dead heat: A mere tenth of a point separates the 2nd and 3rd place teams, though neither comes close to the market leader.
Highly competitive treatment area: Performance scores are generally high, and even the lowest ranking team scores relatively well for overall quality of interactions.
Top team is also the most active: Significantly more oncologists report interacting with the top brand’s medical affairs team in the last 6 months.
Solid performance in important areas: Most teams are doing well in areas oncologists consider important, but many still have specific improvements to make.
Email surprisingly popular: While US oncologists show little interest in other digital interactions, email is more popular in the US NSCLC market than in others.
Feedback points to good relationships: Although oncologists identified several areas where teams can improve, very few thought they needed to improve communication.
Clinical support is top priority: The most important medical affairs services for US oncologists all have to do with providing scientific, clinical, and product information.
An Expert-designed Competitive View of Your Medical Affairs Team
Developed with the help of medical affairs specialists, this report gives you an in-depth comparison of 8 medical affairs teams—answering important questions like:
What do oncologists need?
How, and how often are they using your medical affairs team?
What services do they consider most important?
How often should you contact them? What channels are best?
Does your medical affairs team deliver?
How memorable are your team’s interactions with oncologists?
How do oncologists rank your team for performance and satisfaction in 12 key areas?
How does your team compare to the competition—in each area, and overall?
What needs improvement?
Are you delivering the services that are most important to oncologists?
Where do you need to improve?
How can your team enhance its services?
Based on Interviews with Practicing Oncologists
We surveyed 100 US medical oncologists, chosen from the largest community of validated physicians in the world.
Have been practicing for between 3 and 35 years
See at least 5 patients with NSCLC in a typical month
Devote at least 50% of their time to direct patient care
Have interacted with at least one listed product’s medical affairs team in the last 6 months.
We conducted the survey between January 28th and February 9th, 2016.
MONEY BACK GUARANTEE!
At FirstWord, we stand behind our reports. If you're not completely satisfied, we’ll refund your money. Guaranteed.
Table of Contents
1.Objectives, Survey Methodology and Sampling, Products Included in the Survey, Executive Summary
2.Current Status of Interactions with Different Medical Affairs Teams
2.1.Interactions in the past 6 months with Medical Affairs teams for each product
2.2Current frequency of interactions with medical affair teams for each product
3.Competitive Evaluation of Medical Affairs Teams Performance on Various Attributes
3.1.Evaluation of overall quality of interactions with Medical Affairs teams for each product
3.2.Attribute importance of Medical Affairs teams roles to physicians’ practice
3.3.EdgeMap analysis – Competitive evaluation on Medical Affairs teams performance on attributes
3.4.Competitive evaluation of physicians satisfaction of interaction with Medical Affairs teams
3.5Need-Gap analysis by product
4.Preferred Interaction Media, Frequency, and Suggestions for Improvement
4.1.Preferred interaction media and frequency, and suggestions for improvement
Following are different modes of Licenses.
a. Single User License:
This license allows only one person to use the report. This person can use the report on any computer and may take print outs of the report but must take care of not sharing the report (or any information contained therein) with any other individual or people. Unless you purchase a Site License or a Global Site License, a Single User License must be purchased for every single person that wishes to use the report within the same enterprise.
b. Single Site License:
This license allows unlimited users to use the report within one company location, e.g. a regional office. These users can use the report on any computer and may take print outs of the report but must take care of not sharing the report (or any information contained therein) with any other individual or people.
c. Global Site License:
A Global Site License (or Enterprise wide Site License or Global License) is a license granted to original purchaser, who can share a report with other employees and authorized Users of the same organization.
1. How do you deliver the reports?
The delivery of reports is depends on format & mode of license of report(s). Following are different kinds of formats of report(s) and their delivery options :
a. Electronic Format – Through email from Publisher
Report will be sent to your username email address in PDF, Excel, PowerPoint or any other electronic / softcopy format by publisher.
Delivery Time: 12 to 48 hours [depending on time difference or occurrences of national holidays]
b. Hard Copy or Printed Format or CD-Rom – Through Mail or Courier from Publisher
Report will be sent through mail / courier delivery to your shipping address by publisher.
Delivery Time: Less than, few weeks [depending on time difference or occurrences of national holidays]
2. How can I make payment for publications I purchase?
You could be able to make the payment, in following ways:
a. Online Secure Payment through Credit Card Payment : We accept Visa, Master, AMEX Cards & CCAvenue
b. Transfer of fund to our bank account via Bank transfer or Wire transfer
c. Payment via DD or Cheque
3. Is it safe to use my credit card on MarketinfoResearch?
Your personal information and online tranaction on Marketinfo Research is secure, private, and tamper-proof. All credit card payments are processed through secure and trusted payment gateways.