Another bites the dust

Pharma's big brother, FDA yesterday released the recommendations of its endocrinologic and metabolic advisory board who met to ascertain the safety of Sanofi's Acomplia. The panel of 14 experts have unanimously given Acomplia a shake of the head due to increased suidical rates observed in its clinical trials. (http://money.cnn.com/2007/06/13/news/companies/sanofi/index.htm) While the fate of this once-highly-touted-to-be-the-next-blockbuster drug now hinges on FDA's final decision on its approval, the ground seems to be fast sinking from beneath Sanofi's feet.

Although it is already available in Europe and few other countries, Singapore's HSA usually looks towards FDA before reviewing any products for local approval. this turn of event is bound to implicate the approval process locally.

Besides the tedious reanalysis of the NCE's projections, etc, etc. any company caught in a similar situation would be fumbling with issuing corporate statements and internalizing communications. while most non-approvals tend to affect the immediate share prices rather than the ongoing business, it is still a hassle to deal with.

After the Vioxx incident, FDA has certainly tightened its regulatory reins, this has resulted in many pharmas having to delay new product launches/ indications to produce more data. most big pharmas have experienced at least one major setback in the aftermath. AZ chucked the very promising warfarin-substitute, Exanta, after FDA's failed approval despite usage in most parts of Europe. Pfizer quickly released Torcetrapib without even attempting a FDA approval. BMS's muraglitazar was meant to be the first DualPPAR alpha-gamma ligand which at its late stage, was shoved down the bin by its maker and supposed partner, MSD.

Needless to say, non of these drugs made it to our sunny island.

I often question why local companies would commence their pre-marketing activities so prematurely. Surely, the agonising difficulty in having to salvage the companies' image to the customers after building up such excited levels of anticipation amongst them is deterrent enough. but i still see companies hosting extravagant dinners and sponsoring offsite meetings to pre-empt the impending arrival of the so-called blockbuster. more importantly, instead of counting your chicks before they hatch, shouldn't the marketers be more involved in the strategic planning and determining best forms of market access instead of singing about how the new cure-all compound would finally bridge the unmet medical need...

I have little sympathies for these PMs who will may now have to face the uncertain fate of handling a less glamourous product (best case scenario) alternately, the company may just reassign them to cover SFE until the next pipeline dream comes along.

What's in a mascot?

There has been an interesting trend of late. There has been more pharmaceutical brands employing the use of mascots in their campaigns. While there has been an upsurge in the use of mascots and brand characters lately (these last couple of years), it is not entirely new to the market.

Several years ago, Zoloft (which has since gone off patent) had used the familiar bright yellow smiley face icon to great success. Even till this day, psychiatrists and patients still bear a warm affinity towards the brand.

Recent local pharma campaigns have seen the creation of (to name a few):

The Protectors (GSK- vaccines), a group of children cartoon characters out to save and rid the world of naughty viruses
the Seretide dinosaur (GSK- seretide), another purple dinosaur, resembling nothing like its richer cousin in showbiz
the Nicorette man (Pfizer- nicorette), see above. 'nuff said
the Thrombus man (SanofiBMS- Plavix), a giant reddish blob of lard (mainly nasty LDL deposits)
Pneumo (Wyeth- Prevenar), a cute cuddly blue teddy bear albeit with a darkened patch over its left eye (not a side effect hopefully)
and of questionable 'taste', Mr Cucumber head (Pfizer-Viagra), this one has yet to prove whether it has 'staying power'- puns intended.

many of us have grown up with watching our mothers sweeten our morning beverage with the dutch lady milk, devouring breakfast cereal with tony the tiger promising a great start to the day, taking photos with the colonel outside KFC restaurants... the list goes on. consumer brands are rift with mascots. Mascots are great for creating a brand identity, sometimes encompassing the features of the product. besides capturing consumers' attention, they also create an emotive association with the brand and when done nicely, will essentially lead to an enduring relationship with the consumer.

with its sudden increase in popularity in pharma, i am forced to ponder about the true value of a mascot in pharma marketing.

marketers in drug companies are expected to prep the local market for launch of a new product by finding an unmet need in the treatment of so-and-so disease, penetrate the segments in which the product is indicated for, increase market share year-on-year, manage the PLC, strategize and gain market share against competitors, prepare for threat of new players, and eventually entry of generic substitutes, and depending on the pipeline potential of the company, may still be expected to grow the drug past patent expiry if the organization's survival depends on it. All these have to be done within a decade. Unlike consumer brands, drug patents only run for a maximum of 10 years in most countries. Pharma marketing is like marketing fast forward. with hardly any time to optimize profits, creating a lasting brand equity through (in this context,) the mascot seem like a real fantasy to me.

which is why i find most pharma mascots to be such a sad waste of creative effort. i believe that many are done with the intention of amusing for the short-term rather than as a real brand identifier for the long-term. and looking at how many are introduced from the mid to late stage of the PLC, it serves to ask what the brand managers are hoping to achieve in their objectives.

on a last note however, mascots can be fun and have definitely injected some level of color and excitement into this (at most times ) rather dull industry. In any case, Viagra's Mr cucumber was a real 'head' turner (apologies- just can't stop the puns!) i dread to imagine what mascot Servier would serve up for Daflon! egad!