In the United States, there is a sustained growth in social network memberships among physicians from 2007 to 2011, reaching more than 3 million in 2012. In Europe, Germany and the UK are spearheading global alliances. And as expected, the Asia-Pacific is the fastest growing and dominant region with 35% of the total membership among physicians.

Social networks are rapidly taking the place of traditional sources of product information – with our without the participation of the manufacturer. With reliable and readily available answers to questions and inquiries within the control of the user, the future is bright for social networks. Social content that is managed well and workflow that is optimized will play a leading role with this development. Collaborative productivity, seamless collaboration, increased efficiency and productivity, improved clinical outcomes and reduced costs – these are the keywords that will dictate the success of physicians’ social networks.

One thing to note, though, is how Pharma dislikes a regulatory vacuum. With its risk averse, authoritative and controlling nature, there will be some resistance towards the e-savvy community.  However, we have seen many signs that pharma is taking an active role in being involved in e-communities for patients and physicians. The ability for pharma companies to reach numerous engaged physicians in an online forum is an enticing opportunity and has even helped fuel the growth of these networks.  Not too surprising, considering the declining access trends we have seen within the pharmaceutical sales organization.

With the continued growth of physician social networks over the past 5 years, we knew ultimately there was the potential for these networks to join up and collaborate.  We have already seen some early signs of this in the marketplace, and we are excited to see what might occur here in the future.

As you can imagine, the potential for convergence has been on the mind of many within the digital marketing community and the pharmaceutical industry.  Digital Pharma West is planning to engage our audience in an interactive workshop session where we have some of the world’s largest physician social networks joining us to participate in a group exchange on the current trends and the potential for convergence of these networks in the future.  Click here to visit our agenda for more information.

The recent social media boom has sent Internet marketers and brand managers scrambling to gain traction on any and every network, testing new ideas and strategies to leave their mark.  One strategy that seems to be standing its ground is using infographics to efficiently syndicate data and ideas through popular social media platforms like Pinterest.

By Zoe Dunn

As a follow up to the questions I submitted to FDA regarding the recent Guidance on providing Off-Label responses to unsolicited requests online, I had the pleasure of speaking with Jean-Ah Kang at DDMAC and getting her anecdotal feedback.  Please note, the commentary below is my interpretation of the conversation and in no way a transcript.  This interpretation is mine alone.

Here’s the long and the short of it: Companies need to ask themselves what is their intent – it’s impossible to highlight every single scenario.  Some of the tactics and channels are novel, but the policy position has not changed.  This guidance is not designed to interfere with practice of medicine – physicians can do what they want, but Pharmaceutical companies can’t promote off label to their own benefit.

Global Websites & Wikis

Q: How do we handle global websites such as a corporate Facebook page where some responses may be off-label in the US but not for other countries?

A: We know that companies can’t control where the conversation is coming from.  However, FDA is only US focused. If there is concern about clarifying for the user that they are on a US site versus an ex-US site, segmentation in the form of a pop-up screen would help.  The important thing is identifying responsibility of each party (US or ex-US for a Global company.  Provide the correct segmented contact information in order to allow for responsible follow up.  Also, its important to make sure that the comment is about your product and not someone else’s.

Responding Publically and Privately to Unsolicited Question

Q: Could you provide clarification on the term “choose” in regards to a company’s responsibility to communicate directly to off-label unsolicited requests (i.e. does this mean that a company can choose not to respond)?

A: Any company can choose not to respond.  That said, trying to ignore it is not good.  Up to the company if they want to respond but you need to keep in mind whether you are trying to do the right thing or just justifying your actions.

Q: What Guidances, if any, are there on which unsolicited responses we choose to or not to respond to on sites outside of a pharmaceutical company’s ownership and control?  By responding, are we then assuming responsibility for responding in perpetuity?  If we respond to a request on one website but not another would that be considered cherry picking?

A: Accountability of information is important to FDA and is one of concepts that is one of the 6 areas of information that will likely be focused on for the coming guidances, along with correcting information.  No specific guidance on accountability will be developed, rather, it will be inherent in all of the guidances.  If only responding to positive information and not negative, then there will be attention on the company. Think carefully about your actions before you do it!  Make choices in line with what your company is comfortable with.

Providing Information to Patients & Consumers

Q: Can patients and consumers receive the same information as what we would provide an HCP?

A: There is nothing wrong with giving HCP information to Consumers – consumers can be very savvy.  That said, the information should be in a language that they can understand.  In keeping with this, it’s a best practice to make sure that translations and adaptations do go through DDMAC.  See the suggestion about PPI in section 6 of the draft guidance.  If you are following the spirit of the guidance then it should be okay.

Q: Is a summary of a reprint allowable in addition to the full reprint?

A: Could be concern about that kind of request – if the company summarizes and there is any implied bias or promotion. FDA is not saying that its not allowed, per say, and they are not prohibiting information – they want companies to respond directly.  In regards to whether it’s necessary to submit responses to the FDA to determine if this kind of summary is promotional in nature, again it’s not necessary, because it just shouldn’t be promotional.  It comes down to the data and letting the questioner make the final decision.  It’s important to provide the positive as well as the negative.  Summarizing could, however, present bias and should be approached with caution.

Documentation Retention

Q: Is there any guidance around how long information needs to be retained?

A: No specific recommendation – would welcome feedback for guidance.

Q: What are the requirements for logging and reporting these unsolicited Off-Label interactions (i.e. filing 2253)?

A: No requirement for logging and reporting these conversations (i.e. 2253) because there is no promotion.

Definition of Off-label

Q: Is information that is consistent with approved use, but not contained in the labeling considered “off-label” for the purposes of the draft guidance?

A: Substantial evidence criteria – the more important concept is around being consistent with the approved use.  Even if a concept is not mentioned in PI, but consistent with use, its still on label.  Data from research stages, patient populations, accelerated approval claiming long term survival benefits would be considered off-label.  It doesn’t have to be written in stone with what is in the labeling.  That brings up a key point: its important to have communication between divisions – labeling is not always working with medical communications handling off label requests. Medical communications needs to know the history of communication with FDA on labeling to make sure that the communication is not promotional.  Therefore, the history of labeling can be very useful.

Q: Labeling and requirements around handling of questions that are nuanced and could relate to the trials supporting the labeling.

A: The spirit of the guidance is that if a company follows the guidance than they are in a safe harbor.  They are not necessarily in trouble if they don’t follow every single one.  The FDA does not randomly pick on a company, they do their homework.  Answering off label questions is not going to be the thing that will land a company in trouble, whereas the intent is to promote off label will.  Clarifications about a study design can’t necessarily be considered off label.  That said, if you answer a question and end up in an off label discussion, then will be important to keep things on track.

Hope this was helpful.  Jean-Ah did note that they have not received many comments or recommendations for the Guidance and they would appreciate it.  Though the comments period has passed, please consider sending in your thoughts – it can only help… Good luck and godspeed!

With the emergence of the topic of “Big Data” into mainstream media, it has many wondering what industries are going to sit on the sidelines, and which industry is going to  harness the intel that can come from analyzing the terabytes of data that is being posted and logged on a daily basis and doubling over regularly.  With stats such as 2 million searches, 100,000 tweets and 300,000 people logging onto Facebook in a given minute, it is easy to see how some might look at “Big Data” as something that is too dynamic and too overwhelming of an undertaking.

However, there are many companies out there that have been analyzing this data and leveraging the opportunities that come along with it.  The new “Big Data” analytics is essentially just a very large extension of earlier tools that existed to analyze and mine data.  So large in fact, that early predictions anticipate spending on big data analytics to increase by the billions in the coming years as we see exponential growth in the amount of data being logged.

• Data about diseases
• Data about drugs
• Data about clinical trials
• Data about new indications.
• And, of course there are all of the regulatory considerations that will also be discussed and debated.

Pamela Buford
Director, Consumer / Urology Marketing
Astellas Pharma US, Inc.

1. In what ways do you think pharma can best use social media tactics for its brands, including the corporate brand, while taking care to proactively ensure they are in compliance with the yet-to-be-finalized guidelines?

Social media offers Pharma tremendous opportunity to engage with customers in relevant and timely ways. From a branded perspective, social listening provides new channels to understand prevailing customer needs. Insights gleaned from social networking can lead to more relevant customer programs and support.

Although Facebook, Youtube and Twitter are most commonly referenced, these tactics can be problematic for branded communications due to their lack of on-demand, interactive exchange and monitoring requirements for FDA reporting. Conversely, unbranded and corporate communications may offer more flexibility and impact at this time.

Recent successes in pharma have been more about building connections with customers in relevant channels that provide on-demand information, and less about push advertising. Advertising is acceptable as long as its relevant.

Expectations

Customer expectations for companies participating or advertising in social environments are being set by the most savvy marketers in-and-outside pharma, i.e., Amazon, Facebook, Google. This is creating a high bar for pharma and the need to constantly evaluate how we engage in the social space.

GPP prevails! Although DDMAC guidance have yet to be finalized, fair balance, transparency, responsible disclosure and relevant information standards should not be different based on medium, just in the way it’s implemented.

Corporate policies governing employee and company standards are critical, along with an internal shared learning environment so that best practices, and changes stay up-to-date with customer and regulatory expectations. Periodic internal workshops, senior leadership and cross functional stakeholders training also help to keep the organization apprised and less resistant to embracing digital and social opportunities.

2. In your view, how can companies best take advantage of the integration between offline, online, and mobile business strategies?

Integrated marketing programs spanning offline, online and mobile are no longer novel, they are good business. Integrated campaigns enable message consistency, increased reach, frequency and cost efficiencies while engaging customers when, where and by which channels they prefer. Integration helps your communications to better achieve strategic objectives and offer more relevant and timely information to customers. Mobile should not be an after-thought, it should be part of the integrated communication plan. Caution is advised to resist the temptation to be drawn into the latest/hottest devices and technology. Don’t fall into the trap of chasing technology that doesn’t address or improve your ability to achieve strategic goals. Technology and integrated campaigns should be an enabler to more effectively achieve goals.

3 P’s (Participatory, Personalize and Portable)

Common attributes of successful initiatives follow the 3 P’s (Participatory, Personalized and Portable), are integrated with other communications and provide relevant and timely information without overt branding or advertising.

Information channels, interactive dialogues, sponsored or corporate communities that span multiple disease states and issues impacting customers and companies are enabling more engagement and perceived value from pharma companies.

3. In your opinion, how can company best integrate social gaming into online brand communications?

Social gaming, like all integrated campaign components should enable marketers and brands to better reach and engage customers. The same rules should apply to gaming environments as to any other social or on-line environment, in that communications or branding must be relevant. In my experience gaming sites by definition have high interactivity and are driven by personal preference. Although promotions in these spaces have the potential to provide high awareness, they are usually not highly engaging. This balance, along with strategic objectives should be weighed against all components of an integrated campaign to determine the mix best suited to meet the goal.

Scott K. Dessain, M.D., Ph.D.

At the EXL Pharma 5^th Annual Digital Pharma East conference in Philadelphia on October 19, 2011, I was impressed by the approaches being taken to authentically engage the pharmaceutical customer. Something was missing, though, from many of these efforts: learning from the patients.

There is an important synergy between the need to communicate meaningfully with patients and the need to understand what they can tell us about their health, illness and treatments.  This information is called patient reported outcomes (PRO) data, and it is changing every aspect of the health care field.

I’m not the type of person who would generally be contributing to this blog. Most of the contributors are thought leaders in social media, marketing, and communications, whereas I’m an academic oncologist and medical researcher at Lankenau Hospital in the suburbs of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

I’ve come to start a discussion and gain your insights on a web-based format for PRO data collection and how such a website can incorporate key teaching, compliance, and relationship-building components to strengthen the provider/patient relationship and help support the reasonable use of health care dollars.

What is PRO data and why does it matter?

PRO data refers to information elicited from the patient that reflects the patient’s personal experience of their medical condition. It includes things only a patient can interpret and report, e.g., fatigue, pain, cognitive and social functioning, physical functioning, emotional state, appetite, and sleep quality.

Why do we spend so much money on healthcare in the United States without getting measurably better outcomes than are obtained in more frugal countries? How can we be sure that the money we are spending is worthwhile?

As we try to improve the cost-effectiveness of our healthcare system, it will become increasingly important to know if what we are doing makes sense. This isn’t just because we want to make sure we’re doing what’s best for patients. It’s also because those paying the bills will want us to justify the costs.

This is why PRO data matters. Basically, healthcare payers won’t pay for medical treatments that do not improve quality of life for patients, but we simply do not have enough of this kind of data.

One of my physician colleagues said recently at lunch, “I saw 7 patients in clinic this morning and didn’t make a single evidence-based decision.”  It is not that he is not a medical scholar. The fact is that much of what we do in medicine is not validated by clinical data. This is especially the case for clinical PRO data.

How I got into this

My immunology research laboratory works on therapeutics for biodefense, infectious disease, and cancer. This means we try to understand how the human immune system uses antibodies to fight disease and use that understanding to make drugs for people.

I also founded a biotech company, Immunome Inc. (www.immunomeinc.com), which provides human monoclonal antibodies for others that are looking to diagnose or treat human diseases.  When I started Immunome, I never guessed that I would need to stick my head out of my science cocoon.

But something has been nagging at me as my company strives to create $1B antibody therapeutics. What happens if we are successful? What if the thousands of other biotech companies in the United States also create $1B drugs?

Who is going to pay for all these drugs, in a society strained by an overwhelmed budget and debt? How are we going to know that our therapies are worth the money, or even how much to pay for them?

A lot will depend on our ability to demonstrate to payers that we are improving the quality of life (QOL) for our patients. We are already seeing how QOL data can have important financial implications for the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industry.

PRO data and the FDA

Genentech recently lost the FDA indication for giving bevacizumab, Avastin, to patients with metastatic breast cancer. This is a decision that will cost the company over $1B annually, and it means that we may have difficulty obtaining insurance company reimbursement for patients who need the drug.  (I honestly don’t know if that was the right decision, but it seems clear that some women do very well with it).

Data in multiple studies showed that patients who received Avastin had a longer period of survival without progression of their cancer. However, the overall survival (the average time that the patients lived after starting treatment) for these patients was not improved. In their presentation to the FDA Oncology Drugs Advisory Committee in July, 2010, (http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/Calendar/ucm213724.htm) Genentech argued that the quality of life for patients who have a longer progression free survival is better. This may make intuitive sense.  It means that women who receive the drug would have a longer time without facing the inevitable progression of their fatal disease.

But Dr. Wyndham Wilson of the NCI asked,  “So, are there data either from the study are from past studies in metastatic breast cancer where progression free survival translates to an improvement in patient reported outcomes?”  Dr. Sandra Horning of Genentech noted that they had evidence from one study, AVADO, which demonstrated that quality of life in the Avastin group was not worse.  But she further commented on the challenges in obtaining quality of life (QOL) data, due to need to measure different symptoms and because it is “collected at intervals that may or may not capture quality-of-life changes.”

Everyone learned a valuable lesson from this. If we want our drugs to be paid for in the future, we will need to demonstrate that they make a difference in a way that is important to the patient.

The medical research community has been alert to this problem for some time. I searched the National Institutes of Health clinical trials database (clinicaltrials.gov) website for “quality of life” and found over 11,000 trials that are measuring some aspect of “quality of life”. Of these, cancer trials numbered 3396.

The FDA in 2009 provided guidance on this issue:

“Findings measured by a well-defined and reliable PRO instrument in appropriately designed investigations can be used to support a claim in medical product labeling”

(http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM193282.pdf)

So, PRO data is going to be helpful and/or essential to the approval of drugs in the future.

A clinical trial for PRO data collection on the web

At Digital Pharma East conference I presented a talk entitled “Examining A Clinical Trial that Uses Web-Based Video To Capture Quality Of Life Data In Cancer Patients”. The potential for using web communication in medicine is untapped and vast. Many people, especially patients, are in contact with the web through some device. A web-based application crosses socioeconomic boundaries because it can be accessed via mobile and other web-enabled devices.

Can we create a web-based collection method for PRO data that is timely, accessible, comfortable, and effective? What would be the best format for this?

Survey questions asked by a person in a video format would be an improvement over a paper survey. The web-based survey could be answered on any platform, it could be taken at a time convenient for the patient, and the data would be securely and seamlessly entered into the clinical trial database.

My group at Lankenau has written a study of a web-based survey.  It has been recorded in a video format by ehealthcareTV, who will be hosting the website and collecting the data. We will be testing the prototype study in the clinic soon. Watch this space for further updates as we develop the survey method.

Why is this trial important?

Even as the health care financing is undergoing tremendous change, our patients are changing, as well.  They are becoming increasingly comfortable with and reliant on the web for communication and medical information. They are becoming more involved in the medical decision process. Lastly, they are struggling along with health care providers to ensure that what we do, and what gets reimbursed, makes sense for them and for society.

We need to find the best ways to use media and the web to build trust and learn what our patients can teach us.  The web is one of the best ways to communicate with our patients. We need to learn how to use the web to better listen to them.

How you can help

We’ve started with quality of life assessments in cancer patients.  We’re interested in learning what other types of data would particularly benefit from a web-based survey method. Also, could a web-based survey be used to simultaneously convey positive messages (lifestyle, encouragement). These could help improve patient awareness and health, as well as building trust between caregivers and patients.  Do you have any ideas or suggestions? For further information, contact me or check out the website: www.eHealthcareTV.com.

Thank you to my friend Christine Cavalier, M.Ed., an expert in Social Media Education and Psychology (www.purplecar.net), for her contribution to the study design and to this article.

Scott K. Dessain, M.D., Ph.D. is a co-founder of eHealthcareTV and an Associate Professor at the Lankenau Institute for Medical Research.

The conference was aimed at sharing ideas, theory and best practice on how Digital marketing can assist a businesses grow.

My particular talk focussed on how to consistently communicate a company’s sustainable competitive advantage via the digital media touchpoints through which your target group receives your marketing messages.

Firstly we must explore sustainable competitive advantage (SCA)

Kotler, P, Keller, K, et al 2009. Marketing Management, 1st Ed Harlow: Pearson Education

Describes SCA as – ‘Using the business’s skills to deliver superior customer value to the chosen target segments at a cost that will result in a reasonable profit’

This can be further explored as follows,

Skills- competencies and know how,          Resources – plant, assets, people

Superior- Greater than the norm                 Value – as perceived by the customer

Segments- where you have a differentiated USP   Cost- internal cost of goods

Profit – achieving a good selling price to cover your costs and result in a good profit

Naturally one can only complete this exercise once you have defined your market segment, your positioning within that segment, the competitive advantage that gives you this positioning and how you are going to sustain this.

Next we need to take a brief look at a value chain so we fully understand where the value we are offering the customer comes from and be able to communicate this

Porters value chain consists of a number of key elements

Source: From Porter M. E. (1985) Competitive Advantage. Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance, New York: Free Press.

Many medtech companies are strong in the technology development stream along with the marketing, sales and service capabilities, however the core values of a business and how it manages, trains, motivates and treats its staff or its efficiency in manufacturing high volume goods are also important considerations.

Unsurprisingly for a room of digital marketing professionals the delegates where mostly active users of Twitter, Facebook and Linkedin for personal use, many where also starting to use these media for professional use. Why do we use these media, let us explore some the theoretical dimensions behind social networks

Kotler, P, Keller, K, et al 2009. Marketing Management, 1st Ed Harlow: Pearson Education

Describe social networks as having three dimensions

1- Tie strength, a sense of an intimate relationship with a voluntary investment in the desire for companionship. This is borne out in social media in that we have to elect to follow somebody on Twitter, like something on Facebook and confirm a connection on Linkedin. These are positive actions, we wish to be a part of something, we have an interest in frequent interactions and a sense of mutuality in the relationship.

2- Actor attributes, there is a homophily between the members of a social network, the people taking part will have similar attributes and interests, this is not only the topic in hand, medical device marketing, but can also be demographically significant as well.

3- Source credibility, I am sure we all go to the same media sources for our news be it business news, market analysis or sports updates. We do this because the source has credibility with us. The source has built this by communicating not only accurate and truthful information but probably by adding in some analysis and commentary that we respect.

The current trends in digital media are accepted and these are broadly

We are all spending more time online, younger people are most active but other age groups show increasing activity, 80% of internet users look online for healthcare information
Healthcare professionals particularly Doctors are a very active online group both during working hours and outside of these. 40% of Facebook users follow a brand, 51% of these  purchase the brand, Coke has 33million likes on facebook. Traditional paper based media spend in medtech is in steep decline and digital is fast replacing this.
Today’s leading companies need to be able to use digital marketing as part of the whole marketing mix, it should not be separated.

Before we have a look at how some medical technology companies are using digital media lets just review the digital touchpoints. Traditionally a touchpoint is anywhere a customer experiences, ‘or is touched’ by your business.
In the past this has been mainly through human, paper or telephone contact, with appropriate product, customer service and company values training then the quality and consistency of the customer experience across these touchpoints can be monitored and measured.

Digital poses some different challenges.
Any employee can send a digital message from a mobile phone 24/7 with very little control and any customer can post negative material about your company or product. There are numerous digital media and thus tracking what is being said across these is nigh on impossible.
A number of speakers and delegates mentioned Radian6, a social media monitoring tool that allows you to listen, measure, monitor and engage with what is being said. Some delegates stated they were not allowed to mention, on their personal Facebook or Linkedin pages who they worked for, other companies insist they take ownership of Linkedin accounts when an employee leaves.
One story I heard was that the sales team ‘manage’ the customer interface and marketing should not be interacting directly with the customer without the sales team’s knowledge, I really thought such control nonsense had disappeared from our business. The customer relationship belongs to the business as a whole, the sales team is simply the primary vehicle through which this relationship is mainly managed, but not the only one.

So exactly what is corporate medtech doing with social media well the most commonly used sources are Youtube, Linkedin, Facebook and Twitter.

Youtube receives 3bn hits per day and has 48hrs of new content loaded per minute, it is being widely used for product videos, surgery demonstrations of new techniques, training videos and the opportunity of CEO’s to talk about their business as a recruiting or investor relations tool.
Linkedin with about 140m users has about 2m company pages and most of the medium to large medtech companies are actively engaged, this is a very popular recruiting tool, as well as a method to create specific groups about your product of therapeutic area
Facebook with 850m users is gaining in popularity amongst medtech companies with conference information, product news, launches, and company news all being popular content types
Twitter with around 50m active users is also gaining in popularity, Medtronic have 8-10 separate feeds inline with business areas, Abbott has at least 4 active feeds, and many of the delegates in the room stated they were now starting to use this media.

Clearly with the public nature and easy access of these media, legal concerns have been one of the main stumbling blocks to gaining internal approval, once received the monitoring and control of content needs to be managed.
One large medtech corporation approached this by creating a whole host of real posts they wished to use, as well as creating fictitious posts that could come from employees, ex employees or disgruntled customers and answer posts to these. This body of text was then internally reviewed by the company business and legal teams and a risk profile agreed.
This company is now active across all the main media and has had no negative posts they can track.
Some of he larger companies operate invitation only online forums for discussion about products and therapy areas, these are loosely moderated but allow for open comments and discussion, the feedback from these companies was that they receive very little negative posts in these communities.

This example of closed loop marketing was also spoken about by other speakers who had or were about to role out Ipads to their sales teams. This exercise requires careful planning and you need to understand exactly what you hope this business tool will do for you, it will not replace your smartphone and not your laptop. Product information can be accessed and managed centrally, app access and pages viewed can also be measured as a metric of success. The tablet can link with your CRM to improve data capture and customer interaction, however the adoption of the tablet can be mixed across the sales team depending on how tech savvy they are. Sales people can become dependent upon it and forget other steps in the selling process, finally those companies who were implementing tablets across their business were not able to measure a clear ROI as yet, it is still early days but this is a large investment and it needs to affect the bottom line positively.

Digital marketing, far from being a scattergun approach where you are unsure who will catch your message, if well used, can be a highly targeted activity received by a like minded group who have elected to be hear what you have to say and are actively listening.
As Digital marketing professionals we need to be taking a lead and demonstrate to our peers the power that this media can have, its usage needs to be carefully planned like any marketing activity, you need to decide what you wish to get out of its use and how you will measures this.

Ian Sandison is a medical technology business consultant, assisting healthcare inventors and startups. He contributes to the Cambridge University Judge Business School Entrepreneurship and MBA programmes and lectures in Strategic Marketing at Lord Ashcroft International Business School in Cambridge. He is also a Director of Remtec Search and Selection a leading European Lifescience and medtech search company.

www.iansandison.co.uk

The forum will be held January 26-27 at the Marriott Forrestal Village Conference Center in Princeton, NJ. For the agenda and registration information, visit the website here.

The event will feature insights into the latest innovations in life sciences, including:

• Implementing a New approach to Clinical Trial Management, the Clinical Trials Framework
• Extending the Innovation Network for Capability Enhancement and to Optimize Spending
• Assessing the Impact of Electronic Source on Trial Operations, Data Management, EMR Integration
• Utilize Collaborative Technologies to Enable Virtual Collaboration and Training
• Leveraging Structured Content from Protocol through Submission

I hope to see you at the event where we’ll hear first-hand from companies including Pfizer, J&J, SANOFI, Eli Lilly, PPD as well as my colleagues at Microsoft.

If you would like to register for the event, please click here. See you then!

Within the eBook, you will learn how keywords, content and presentation can impact SEO performance and be able to determine how your website’s SEO performance measures up against the pharma industry averages for statistics; such as average search query length.

In a heavily regulated industry like pharma, brands can still have an optimized digital presence. iProspect has become an industry leader by developing and implementing successful digital strategies for our heath science clients – helping tailor their content for maximum search visibility, while adhering to regulatory guidelines.

iProspect’s dedicated Health Sciences practice focuses on developing and implementing innovative campaigns at every level of engagement for healthcare brands including Bristol-Myers Squibb, Alcon, Shire and athenahealth.

Interested in speaking with one of our health sciences experts? Contact Casey Williams, Client Services Director, Health Sciences at moreinfo@iprospect.com.

We’re excited to share the eBook. Download it today. We hope you enjoy it.

—-

Click on the image below to view the full presentation: