Contents:

Metrics Overview The following is a list of metrics included in A Guidebook to Pharma Brand Optimization: Lifecycle Management Strategy. While this list is not inclusive of all the data in the report, it summarizes the main categories and types of data included in each chapter. Chapter 1: Companies’ LCM Structures Dedicated Lifecycle Management Team Dedicated Lifecycle Management Team Reports to Which Department Departments Responsible for LCM when No Dedicated Team Exists Company F’s LCM Structure Title of Those Responsible for Spearheading LCM Other Functions Involved in LCM During Various Time Periods LCM Budgets Tied to Individual Brands Funding of LCM Budgets Lifecycle Management Ratings Important Factors to Have a Successful LCM Effort Areas with Greatest Room for Improvement Importance of Criteria in Assessing LCM Tactics LCM Success Measurements Chapter 2: Pre-Launch LCM Tactical Timeline Pre-Launch LCM Strategy Investment Levels Average Time to Implement Pre-Launch LCM Strategies Pre-Launch LCM Strategy Time to Implement vs. Return on Investment Pre-Launch LCM Strategy Return on Investment There are five LCM tactics examined in this chapter, including divestitures, new formulations/delivery systems, strategic alliances/licensing, publications strategy and contracting with large volume purchasers. Within each LCM tactic profile there are the following graphics: Tactic Dashboard: Implementation Timeline, Return on Investment, Development Time, Average Investment, Industry Case Studies Planning for Tactic Begins Implementation for Tactic Begins Effectiveness of LCM Tactic Chapter 3: Peak (Launch until two years prior to US patent expiration) LCM Tactical Timeline Peak LCM Strategy Investment Levels Average Time to Implement Peak LCM Strategies Peak LCM Strategy Time to Implement vs. Return on Investment Peak LCM Strategy Return on Investment There are six LCM tactics examined in this chapter: strategic pricing, new dosing frequency, new dosing strength, new indication, CRM/disease management, market repositioning and repurposing. Within each LCM tactic profile there are the following graphics: Tactic Dashboard: Implementation Timeline, Return on Investment, Development Time, Average Investment, Industry Case Studies Planning for Tactic Begins Implementation for Tactic Begins Effectiveness of LCM Tactic Chapter 4: Mature (Two years prior to US patent expiration and beyond) LCM Tactical Timeline Mature LCM Strategy Investment Levels Average Time to Implement Mature LCM Strategies Mature LCM Strategy Time to Implement vs. Return on Investment Mature LCM Strategy Return on Investment There are six LCM tactics examined in this chapter including: pediatric indications, new combinations, next generation product, patent litigation, branded generics, Rx-to-OTC and removal from market. Within each LCM tactic profile there are the following graphics: Tactic Dashboard: Implementation Timeline, Return on Investment, Development Time, Average Investment, Industry Case Studies Planning for Tactic Begins Implementation for Tactic Begins Effectiveness of LCM Tactic Chapter 5: There are seven individual brand LCM profiles, most of which contain the following metrics and graphics. Brand Overview: Peak Sales, Therapeutic Area, Company Size, Brand Erosion, Number of Years of Patent Protection on US Market Competitive Outlook: Number of Generic and Branded Competitors Greatest Threats to Brand LCM Tactical Approach LCM Tactic Timelines: When Planning for Tactic Begins Annual LCM Strategy Investments LCM Strategy Annual Investments by Time Period LCM Headcount Support Percentage of Brand’s Marketing Budget Allocated to LCM LCM Strategy Investments, Returns and Returns on Investment Percentages LCM Strategies’ Average Returns Per Dollar Invested

Summary:

Sample Content (The following is excerpted from “Chapter 1: LCM Structure, Processes and Challenges”) Alter Lifecycle Management Priorities as the Drug Reaches Each Milestone Lifecycle management is relatively new to the pharmaceutical industry’s vocabulary. Two decades ago, lifecycle management was not as prevalent or formal as it is in today’s corporate cultures. Often, lifecycle management processes arose out of necessity. For example, when Company O began from the merger of two companies, the new company had no immediate pipeline priorities. Strategic planners knew that the company had to focus on lifecycle management for the first two to three years. In fact, the company employed a staff of 11 lifecycle management team members, which was quite large at the time. Since that time, lifecycle management has evolved as a function within the pharmaceutical industry. Certainly, companies had been involved in LCM activities for decades, but there had never been any formal resource allocation or pipeline realignment associated with the function. Today, there are far more formal processes in place to ensure that companies focus on lifecycle management from development to patent expiration and beyond. LCM executives must constantly change their priorities as a drug moves through various lifecycle stages. At each milestone, LCM teams must focus on different tactics to pursue. Although a new stage in a product’s life requires LCM teams to execute the task at hand, executives must always remember how each LCM activity fits into the big picture. LCM priorities during early-stage development can change with each development phase. Once the drug launches, each new year means that patent expiration is that much closer and, therefore, brand teams will need to focus on preparing for that milestone. Even after patents expire, companies still have options to maximize their drugs’ value. …. ...To read more, please see Chapter 1 of A Guidebook to Pharma Brand Optimization: Lifecycle Management Strategy. (The following is excerpted from “Chapter 1: LCM Structure, Processes and Challenges”) Attaining Sufficient Funding and Resources to Launch LCM Efforts For the most part, funding for LCM activities is tied to individual brands. According to Figure 1.8 [figure appears in full report], 86% of companies tie LCM budgets to individual brands while the remaining 14% comes from other sources. It makes logical sense for LCM activities to be funded via brand budgets because the activities that are performed are intended to have a positive impact on a specific brand. However, not every company derives its LCM funding from brand budgets. The remaining 14% of study participants, who do not tie LCM funds to brand budgets, provide LCM funding through marketing or R&D. One of the two companies in this category funds its LCM activities from both marketing and R&D. As Figure 1.9 [figure appears in full report] illustrates, these two companies do make up the minority, but they do have a system in place that provides funding for LCM-focused activities. No matter where the funding comes from, it can sometimes be a challenge to attain sufficient resources to provide adequate LCM support for a brand. An interviewee gave a prime example of this all-too-common struggle for resources: the LCM team member had to fight to get funding for a $35,000 white paper, which ultimately saved the company upwards of $35 million from a competitor. As the interviewee noted, it would not have mattered if he/she was asking for $2 million to write the white paper – either way it was going to be an uphill battle to secure the necessary funding to go through with the LCM tactic. To overcome the challenge of winning necessary funding for LCM, a Company F executive suggested that LCM team members go to as high as they can within the organization to make sure that upper management not only understands LCM and its benefits, but also try to sell the process of LCM as much as possible. Achieving buy-in from upper management is critical in gaining financial support for LCM as well as cultural support for developing an LCM-conscious organization. Although there are always other market factors at play, companies that take the time to analyze the benefits of investing in specific LCM tactics have a better idea of what type of return the tactics might produce. As LCM teams and functions beginning developing LCM strategy and objectives for a brand, it is typical for them to explore which strategies will have the best payout for a brand. So LCM teams who are able to provide evidence-based research on the resource implications of investing in a specific LCM tactic are in better position to request and receive adequate funding for the LCM initiative. ...To read more, please see Chapter 1 of A Guidebook to Pharma Brand Optimization: Lifecycle Management Strategy.

Companies Mentioned

AstraZeneca Biogen Idec Bristol-Myers Squibb Farma S.A. Genentech Genzyme Grey Healthcare Group Implicit Bioscience Janssen-Cilag Prescription for Strategy LLC Novartis Replidyne, Inc Sanofi-Aventis Valeant Pharmaceuticals