How We Can Help
Our mission is to help our pharma, medical device and digital health clients achieve optimal patient access to their products and services across Asia Pacific and emerging markets.
The first question we help our clients answer is: what are the barriers preventing eligible patients receiving our treatment or product?
To answer this question we take a broad perspective to access and explore what barriers may reside not just on the pricing & reimbursement decision-making pathway, but also along provider and institutional funding flows, patient journeys, HCP referral pathways and product distribution flows.
The second, broad, question we help our clients answer is: how to do we best navigate past these barriers to accelerate funding timelines and ensure optimal patient access and coverage for our product?
Answering this question may involve investigating the likely reception for a new technology from P&R authorities, exploring partnership opportunities with a provider, developing stakeholder engagement strategies or designing and implementing a self-pay access programme.
The case studies below will give you a better flavour of the range of work we have delivered to our clients over the past twelve months. Our client testimonials at the bottom of the page will give you a better sense of what’s like to work with us.
If you’d like to discuss how we may be able to help you identify and navigate past a particular challenge you have, then email us at firstname.lastname@example.org
Objective: Identify likely pushback from pricing and reimbursement authorities to two new rare disease therapies in Australia, China, Japan, Korea, Singapore and Taiwan.
Project approach: Given the different nature of the P&R systems of the markets in scope, as well as the different launch status of the products in question, we used different approaches across the markets in-scope to generate insights to help our client make decisions on pricing and reimbursement strategy.
For Australia and Taiwan, we ran a mock payer negotiation exercise in Singapore, with the client’s country teams ‘pitching’ their case for reimbursement to a panel of ex-payers and handling their objections.
For Japan, we ran advisory board-style meetings with academic advisors to the government to help advise on how to make the best case for a price premium.
For China, Korea and Singapore we conducted interviews (some F2F, some by telephone) with payers, payer advisors and hospital social workers to test value messages and identify the best route to funding.
Outputs: By soliciting insights from senior payers and ex-payers we were able to provide the client with a set of actionable insights and recommendations for how to make the strongest case possible for favourable pricing and reimbursement, specific to each market.
Objective: To help our client prepare its access planning for a new targeted cancer therapy in Argentina, Australia, China, Hong Kong, Korea, Mexico, Russia, Taiwan and Turkey by identifying a) how each P&R system has treated existing therapies in the same class and b) how each P&R system will likely respond to a new entrant to that class.
Project approach: We took a pragmatic approach, based on a limited budget from the client. First, we answered as many of our research questions through secondary research. Only after that, did we conduct primary research with KOLs and payers in order to fill the remaining gaps. As a result, in Australia we mapped the landscape through secondary research only, while in Argentina and Russia we conducted five stakeholder discussions. In China we conducted eight discussions so we could gauge the landscape in second-tier provinces and cities, as well as the obvious Tier 1 targets.
Outputs: We provided the client with detailed access landscapes for each of the ten markets, as well as a cross-market executive summary for senior management. The project outputs then fed into other commercial strategy work-streams the client had running.
Objective: To help our client identify barriers along both the patient journey and HCP referral pathway that would prevent eligible patients in Australia receiving a cardiology device.
Project approach: We conducted 15 in-depth interviews with general cardiologists across multiple Australian cities and 16 face-to-face patient interviews.
Outputs: The in-depth research programme ensured we were able to generate a plethora of insights into questions such as:
- What HCPs are patients seeing at different stages of their disease journey?
- What is the nature of the patient-HCP interaction, at diagnosis, initiation and later on in their treatment?
- What information do HCPs share with their patients and how do patients interpret them?
- What is the emotional journey patients go on and how does this affect their treatment choices?
- What factors drive treatment recommendations from HCPs and what factors drive patients’ treatment preferences?
- What are the reasons why HCPs are not recommending the client’s product in greater numbers?
- What specific actions from the client could address these barriers?
We summarised these findings, conclusions and recommendations in an in-depth report and an executive summary and presented the conclusions and recommendations in two sessions to the client’s team.
Objective: To identify the gap between formal international reference pricing policies across 16 Asian markets and what actually takes places, informally, both to inform internal thinking on how to engage with IPR as a policy issue, as well as to inform strategy and tactics in pricing submissions and negotiations.
Project approach: The challenge on this project was that in many Asian markets even the formal mechanisms of IPR are not transparent and, beyond that, in all markets there are informal practices that no-one wants to admit to. In order to gauge what is going on, we interviewed a variety of experts from current pricing authority representatives, to former pricing decision-makers and external advisors who could give a more objective picture.
Outputs: We were able to generate a detailed picture of both formal and informal IPR and broader pricing policy practices, by market.
We communicated these insights to the client both in the form of a reference pricing matrix (of who is referencing whom), as well as detailed country summaries and an executive summary of recommendations for how the client should respond to IPR in each market.
Objective: In a previous project for the same client, we had recommended a series of access-related growth opportunities in South East Asia across their whole portfolio. The client had prioritised one of these opportunities, which was a self-pay access programme for a chronic disease specialty brand in Indonesia.
The objective for this project was to take develop that model into a full-fledged programme design, develop the business case, engage with a provider chain through which the programme would be delivered to patients and to train the local country team for launch of a pilot programme.
Project approach: Firstly, we mapped the barriers preventing more patients initiating on the client’s therapy and from adhering to the optimal dose. We then designed a programme’s benefits package to address these barriers, using a ‘patient payment plan’ model. Secondly, we engaged with two target specialist private provider chains in Jakarta to identify their interest and objectives in a potential collaboration (such as willingness to share costs in the short term to increase revenue in the long term). We then factored these assumptions into a business case, modelling ROI based on different scenarios. Finally, we trained the local team in Jakarta for entering formal negotiations with the providers to launch a pilot scheme.
Outputs: Based on the programme design and business case, the client subsequently agreed to enter a pilot partnership with one of the provider chains as a way of addressing the affordability barrier and improving patient access.