In February 2004, the US FDA’s Division of Drug Marketing, Advertising and Communications (DDMAC) drafted guidelines governing the creation of unbranded websites, which spelled out rules that marketers should follow. Breaking a number of these rules resulted in Novartis receiving warning letters from DDMAC back in April about two of the company’s unbranded sites: www.gistalliance.com and www.cmlalliance.com.

Where Did Novartis Go Wrong?

Both Novartis sites were deemed to be overtly promotional of the Novartis therapy, Gleevec. Here’s where the sites went wrong:

• Promoted the use of Gleevec outside its indication and made unsubstantiated dosing-related claims
• Were “perceptually similar” in terms of color schemes and layout to the Gleevec site
• Included “representation or suggestion relating to a particular drug,” including: direct links to the Gleevec product website; references within a publication on the site to a pivotal Gleevec trial; and footnotes on the site that referenced imatinib (Gleevec’s established name), and prominently featuring the Novartis logo
• Did not provide fair balance. While unbranded awareness and education programs are not subject to fair balance requirements, the FDA has taken the stance that it is required if the unbranded program “impliedly identifies a particular drug”
• Mentioned a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (”TKI”) for the first line treatment of GIST and CML. Gleevec is the only TKI indicated for first-line treatment of chronic phase CML, and the only TKI indicated for first-line treatment of GIST
• Contained registration opt ins without being clear they were opting into receive “product information” that delivered Novartis communications, promoting Gleevec

Following the Rules

If you’re looking to develop an unbranded or disease awareness website, be sure to adhere to the guidelines outlined by DDMAC:

• Be clear, accurate and reinforce a public health message
• Refer consumers to an HCP for more information
• Ensure the unbranded experience has its own creative identity
  • Use a separate color palate, as well as different visuals and models, from the branded experience
• Review treatment claims as if the piece was branded
• Follow the same strict regulatory guidance in the way the statements are crafted and substantiated
• Provide balanced treatment discussions
• Provide clear opt-in options for consumers, including a double opt in procedure

Following the rules not only helps you avoid a warning letter, it allows you to capitalize on an opportunity to better educate and enhance the value of your sites. In short, you can break through the clutter without breaking the rules!

This argument can be made for the release of the new iPhone 4 from Apple and the infamous “Antennagate.”  There are people, myself included, which bought Apple products aware that the company knowingly produced phones with a performance flaw- the antenna issue.  I do commend Steve Jobs for addressing the issue, after all, the first step toward forgiveness is admitting and acknowledging there is a problem.  They even do so at Apple.com.  Offering customers a free bumper/case did an effective job of mitigating the deeper backlash that could have ensued, while also saving the company close to $300 million dollars if they were to do a full recall on the phone itself. 

I’m not so sure I agree with their saying the antenna death grip  affects all other smart phones such as the BlackBerry Bold 9700, HTC Droid Eris, Motorola Droid X, etc. It doesn’t necessarily reflect well on Apple for throwing others manufacturers ‘under the bus.’

So why are we so loyal to Apple? I am because I’m a slave for fashion, err design. I think most of us Apple loyalists are so because of the continual flow of cool “stuff” that comes out of Cupertino. This is a true case of form over function. And since Apple continually delivers on the form side of the equation, we tend to give them a pass on the function side. Heck, why else would any of us iPhone users endure the spotty AT&T network?  A July 29 article in the Wall Street Journal expands upon the slave to design theme.

Apple brand loyalty was evident again in the release of the iPhone 4 last month in Hong Kong  in a blog post featured in Wall Street Journal, with Apple loyalists willing to suffer through the summer heat in large lines everywhere that offered the phone for sale. 

“I don’t care if the Wi-Fi has as a good connection or not,” said Max Li, one of the customers in line to collect his new phone. “I just like to play games, and the iPhone is a trendy thing,” which further supports the claim that some brand loyalists don’t care if the product they buy is the best offering or may have potential issues.

 “The antenna problem has unsettled some consumers and the negative publicity has taken a little shine off the iPhone brand,” said Neil Mawston, an analyst at market research firm Strategy Analytics. “Competitors have seen the iPhone 4 is not flawless and this will give smartphone rivals a window of opportunity to step up their competitive attacks against Apple over the coming months.”

So bad antenna or not, Apple loyalists will continue to possess deep emotional ties to the innovative design that puts the iPhone and other Apple products ahead of the curve and into our hands.  We will continue to be loyal to the iPhone, regardless if it remains exclusively with an overloaded AT&T network or has design flaws, as long as they deliver on their end of the innovative design bargain.

On July 29, 2010 the FDA issued a warning letter to Novartis for the Facebook share button and sharebar on the Tasigna product website – both consumer and HCP sides. The issue was that when a user clicked the share button, it displayed a post on the user’s Facebook wall. The post was a statement (that varied by page) that typically included the brand name and the indication. It was a brief statement with a link to the website, so of course it did not include fair balance. Further, language within the statement used on some of the pages used superiority language that FDA had previously told them not to use.

So, what does this mean?

First, just as in the instance of the Gleevec unbranded letters this spring, it actually changes nothing. Novartis, for the second time this year, simply violated known and understood DDMAC policies. It’s shocking, actually, that after the unbranded letters, that they did not do a better job following well established rules in the rest of their communications (particularly interactive communications).

This letter is certainly NOT a new FDA policy prohibiting the use of share tools or social media in branded pharma. It does reinforce the FDA policies regarding claims and balance and that channel and format does not change the rules. As with all things, the devil is in the execution.

What concerns us, is that, as with the unbranded Gleevec letters, the industry will overreact and start pulling back on their investments or efforts within social media. This should not be our response; we should take this as confirmation that DDMAC sees the internet and social media the same as every other channel and applies the same rules. We as an industry just need to accept that fact and follow the rules!

In an age that prides itself on learning more through interaction and less through reading, YouTube provides users with a plethora of health information that may or may not be the most accurate, but where your video falls in line depends on you and how much effort and creativity you put into it.

According to a BBC News release , YouTube videos account for 60% of all videos watched online, so while placing a video on your website may give you an edge among the targeted few, posting it on YouTube makes it available to the interested many surfing YouTube channels.

YouTube, according to Alexa.com, is rated the third most visited website on the internet, falling right below Facebook and Google.  In 2008, YouTube surpassed Yahoo as the worlds #2 search engine.  Ensuring broad visibility of your video, YouTube provides Marketers with the capability to reach global audiences cost free.  With time and effort–because nothing worth looking at is created in mere minutes–YouTube can become not just a platform to another digital outlet, but can also serve broader purposes in your marketing campaign.  It becomes a powerful channel to those marketers striving to build awareness, allowing them to reach patients and HCP’s where they are online.

Pharma companies have just begun chomping at the bit when it comes to YouTube.  Those that have taken the initiative include Johnson & Johnson, Novartis, Sanofi-Aventis and Ortho-McNeil-Janssen Pharmaceuticals.  Johnson & Johnson, a dominant force in social media, has taken its content one step further by creating its own YouTube channel.  J&J’s channel presently has 2,706 subscribers and total upload views surpassing 2 million.  In comparison, the Novartis channel has 361 subscribers and over 57,000 views.  So why is there such an expansive difference between these two companies’ channels?  There could be a number of reasons but it may simply come down to the content, the flashiness of the site, and its entertainment value.  Many company channels and videos also post patient testimonials among their commercials and news updates giving audiences a handful of material to look at. 

YouTube has not yet reached its peak as the prevailing social media tool in the Pharma industry, but its simple setup and broad visibility represents itself as a prominent tool for growth and expansion.

So why not start today? Facing the unknown can always be a bit intimidating but with resources from helpful sites like http://www.doseofdigital.com/2009/09/8-tips-help-own-youtube-search-results and http://www.google.com/support/youtube/, the ability to create and upload will be easier than you think and the benefits will surly outweigh the hassles.

At Compass, we believe that a brand is not a benefit, a formula, a name, or a logo. A brand is a contract with your targets.

Our job as marketers is to create and articulate your brand’s identity so that it is interpreted by each of your targets on terms that are relevant to them in their lives. Your brand’s name, logo, and graphics are tangible expressions of this identity while your brand’s promise, personality, and tone, are intangible expressions.

How do you develop your brand so it will grow and become a valuable asset to each of your targets?

The answer to this question is much different today than it was even five years ago. Why? Because of the Internet. The Internet has allowed us to think in and market to multiple targets and segments. Your brand may have to appeal to several very different audiences, each of which has a different set of expectations, perspectives, and reasons why they have come to interact with your brand.

These target audiences are the ones who define the relationship with your brand and what it will and will not mean to them. Another way to think about this is: What do your target audiences say about your brand when you’re not in the room? What do they believe to be true about your brand? Because it’s what they believe, not what you intend, that matters.

Consider these statistics:

• 25% of search results for the World’s Top 20 largest brands are links to user-generated content. (Source: Marketing Vox and Nielsen BuzzMetrics SES Magazine June 8 )
• 34% of bloggers post opinions about products & brands. (Source: Universal McCann’s Social Media Research Wave 3)
• 90% of consumers trust peer recommendations. (Source: July 2009 Nielsen Global Online Consumer Survey)

The communication of your brand—or where your targets learn about it these days—gets a bit tricky. This is especially true online, which is generally the first place your audiences will be introduced to your brand. Many aspects of communicating your brand online are not in your control, especially with the advent, growth and strength of social media. So make sure your intended brand identity is consistent among all your targets wherever you mention it. Know that others may take it and redeploy it—possibly into areas that you may not have even considered.

The Internet also allows you to target and reach each of your segments with the exact message you know your audiences will find valuable about your brand. It is the one medium through which you can deliver a direct, unfiltered definition of your brand and the experience your brand represents—the whole story with less interpretation—keeping it as true as possible to each segment that views it.

Here’s how to do it:

Think in multiples: Multiple segments. Multiple audiences. Multiple interpretations (because now you can). The question is no longer: What is the one message I want to convey? It’s: Who are the multiple segments interacting with my brand? Once you determine this, you need to understand how each segment wants to interact with your brand—on the phone, online, in person—and when they need the information.

Because you can now position your brand to multiple customer segments, you should do your segmentation research when you begin your branding research—even as early as Phase III and label design—and not afterward. Use the segmentation research to identify criteria on which your audience clusters (eg, practice areas, specialties, etc). Explore not only what your key message drivers are, but why, which is the most valued, and how will your messaging be delivered to each segment. Different segments respond to specific articulations of your brand’s identity. Emphasize nuances within your brand’s promise, personality, or values while making sure to maintain consistency on the external expressions. They are like pieces of a jigsaw puzzle that when put together, need to consistently display your brand’s identity. If your pieces are different or disparate, that puzzle will be a mess.

As your message and brand architecture are developed, make sure they are on a flexible platform that can be translated into multiple mediums to different segments—all while ensuring consistency in your brand essence. Next, develop strategies for each segment to receive messages in the form most suitable to them.

None of this is easy and it can’t be learned overnight or performed by older, more traditional agencies. It takes years of living in the segmented marketing world to be able to successfully build and promote a brand in it.

First, let’s take a look at why the search engines should be responsible for having to change the way the results are displayed. No matter what search engine you use, none are proficient at semantic search. For instance, take a look at the result set returned on Hakia for the search query “how can I treat my heartburn?”. As you can see, the intent of my search wasn’t fully understood, and it appears to simply match the terms in my original query. What this means is that text analysis is still a critical factor when determining what pages/sites to include in a result set. Therefore, including targeted disease-state terms in your titles is still going to make a difference in the success of any SEO campaign. Now I know that not including keyword in a title tag isn’t the only reason a site would/wouldn’t rank for a targeted term, but I’m not the only one that knows it matters (just look at #1 under On-Page Factors)! Along with this, at the Social Media hearings that were held recently, Google already stepped forward and showed examples of possible Paid Search ad formats that would be used in order to abide by the FDA’s rulings.

So what have we learned from this example? The engines have the capabilities to alter their results, it’s now just a matter of them doing it.

As we all know, the engines have enhanced results for different verticals. It’s now time to apply those enhanced results styles to pharma. Although a scalable solution that could be supported by all major search would be optimal, for the purposes of this post I will be giving examples that are engine specific. Here are just a few ideas/examples of what the engines currently are doing for other vertical results, and how they could be applied to pharma:

Bing & Document Preview

Bing has a pretty sweet feature called “Document Preview” which allows for a user to gain some understanding as to what a particular result is all about. As you can see in the above example, AJAX is used to display part of the page’s content (ironically enough, the preview above shows the user the Safety Information) when the user hovers over the result. Currently there is only a way to block MSNBOT from adding the document preview via the <meta name=“msnbot”, content=“nopreview”> meta tag. What this leaves open is the ability to implement a directive that tells MSNBOT what content to actually include in the document preview (I’d imagine it would be a microformat / RDFa that was specific to Bing). This would enable a pharma webmaster to mark up the PI, or whatever content is desired to be included that preview.

Microformats & RDFa for Pharma

This is a more scalable solution, that if adopted by all engines risk information could be included in all pharma results. As you may already know, Google and the soon defunct Yahoo! support microformats and RDFa which help them provide enhanced listings for sites in their indices.

Above is an example of a Yelp result that utilizes the hReview-aggregate microformat. This allows Yelp to provide additional information, such as average star and price rating. This sort of enhanced listing would perfect for pharma SEO because of the fact that is could provide a direct link to safety information and it could be supported by all major search engines. A webmaster would simply have to go in mark up the safety information on a page with the correct microformat and they would have an enhanced listing (obviously this is somewhat oversimplifying the process, but you get the picture).

So, what do you think? Do you feel that it is up to the SEO to simply change how their results are displayed in order to comply by future FDA guidance, or should the engines show a little love and make the SERPs a little more pharma friendly?

This weekend, the iPad will launch with all of the excitement and more of the original iPhone. The device has many critics who point out that its lack of Adobe Flash, multi-tasking and camera will make it Apple’s next failure, similar to its now infamous Newton PDA. Other’s are more optimistic about the device and see it revolutionizing how we consume media.

As an ex-Apple employee and admitted “fan boy” – I’ve already pre-ordered mine and eagerly await its arrival. While I’m very excited about the new product and the catalyst it’s sure to be for the current “tablet” marketplace, I’m wondering how it fits into the Pharma marketing mix.

Whenever new platforms or technologies come along, we get lots of interest from our clients. The question we have to ask back is if it’s right for their target audience. We are not resistant to innovation and change, but sometimes it’s not the right fit for a demographic even if it’s the coolest thing in our minds. For now, I feel that the iPad has a lot of potential in the Healthcare Professionals (HCP) sphere of promotion. I think that in time, Direct to consumer (DTC) marketing will find its place in mobile advertising and the iPad specifically.

For HCPs, there is no doubt that they are aware and interested in using the iPad. In a recent survey by Epocrates, the medical software company found that almost 60% of doctors are considering the iPad for their work, with a third of those ready to buy.

This presents a great opportunity to reach HCP audiences who already have the device, as well as leverage their existing interest in the device. The iPad or devices like it could become the most valuable tool in a Sales Reps detailing kit.

Only a few months ago Pfizer armed their sales force with $1500 tablet PCs. For half of that, they could have purchased the cheapest 3G model at $629. In addition to the hardware costs, imagine the savings of not having to print and drop ship sales aides when a regulatory or marketing change is needed.

Available for download from the Apple iTunes App Store, AT&T WorkBench helps extend existing enterprise application services to iPhone / iPad through secure web apps hosted in a managed environment. It enables companies to deploy enterprise applications in a highly-secure manner – even on mobile devices purchased by an individual. With this tool, a technician can securely update an online interactive sales aide to all reps within just a few hours.

For the physicians that have an iPad, medical reprints might become a thing of the past. Instead, companies could offer a custom ePub version of a journal article for HCPs to load into their iBooks App.

There are plenty of other ways the iPad can help save time and money while putting a far more interactive marketing platform in an HCP or Reps hands.

A few more ways it could be applied include:

• Medical Meeting Booth Touch Points
• In-Office Patient Medical Device Training
• On-Demand Detailing / CME

For patients, there are a few obstacles ahead before the iPad or any other “smart” devices can be utilized fully. The main concern is the open “review” feature for Apps. It’s a regulatory person’s worst nightmare – an open text field. This means potential Adverse Event reports and potentially negative comments in general from consumers.

To place a patient focused “App” on the iPad, Pharma will need to go the “Web App” route. In place of “Native Apps,” more companies are turning to optimized “Web Apps.” Web Apps offer several advantages over Native Apps. Web Apps remove the open review field, as well as cut out the developer channel step of submitting to Apple. This way you gain the ability to instantly update your Web App, just like you would for a brand website.

I’m very excited to see how the iPad will be used among marketing teams across different brands, both Pharma and Consumer. Whether you think the iPad is just another flawed Apple product or the next great thing, it’s sure to spur innovation and creativity in new ways of reaching physicians and patients.

1. Be realistic about what you can achieve.

Have you ever found yourself in the middle of a great meal at a favorite restaurant when you suddenly – and regrettably – realize that your eyes were bigger than your belly? Project bloat causes that same queasy feeling. When new project enthusiasm morphs into to a mile-high stack of manuscripts, wireframes and design concepts on your desk, you know you’ve ordered more than you can comfortably swallow – and that you’re not going to meet your deadline. The cost of extending your project’s budgeted duration can lead to significant cost overruns. Time is a silent budget killer. Not only is it costly to keep your team (and your agency’s team) engaged in a project that’s beyond its planned duration, but you’re delaying ROI and missing opportunities to engage those teams on new projects. Even worse, delays can result in missing the window of opportunity to capitalize on the market insight that led you to invest in the project in the first place. To avoid these hazards:

• Be honest about how much time you can carve out of your schedule to work on each program or project in your marketing plan. Share this with your partners so that they know what to expect and how to engage you.
• Be aware of the effort and timing impacts of other projects in your pipeline on your staff and your organization.
• Launch content and features in phases. If launching a new site, start with a placeholder site or HCP-focused content to establish a presence and then follow up with additional content and features.
• Avoid “over-socializing” your project within your organization in the early stages – which can lead to scope additions and time drag from stakeholders not directly invested in your project goals.
• Come to terms with the reality that it’s probably going to take longer than you think – and budget accordingly.

By setting bite-sized, realistic goals you give yourself and your team an advantage in delivering a successful, timely program on schedule and on budget.

2. Make regular, clear communication with partners and vendors a top priority.

You want the best-of-the-best working on your brand for each thing that you do. But what happens when you can’t remember if you told the PR agency or the branding agency or the offline agency or the interactive agency about the new market research insights you received last week? This is an issue with which nearly every busy brand manager struggles. Clear and consistent communication can help to avoid the extra time, effort, churn and rounds feedback. As a start:

• Take the time to talk with your partners each week. If a weekly “status report” format feels like a root canal, be open with your partners about what format works for you.
• Get your agencies and partners together on a regular basis and encourage inter-agency collaboration. Insist on inter-agency cooperation.
• Conduct all-agency calls at least quarterly to ensure that everyone is on the same page.
• Ask for feedback from your partners regularly. Invite them to tell you what they need from you to deliver their best work.

Excellent communication ensures that all of your partners are working as efficiently as possible, with the most current brand and company insights, to deliver a cohesive and impactful brand experience.

3. Schedule an early stage concept review with your med-legal team.

At Compass, we’ve had the great fortune to work with clients that have a passion for innovation and exploration. We’ve delivered some of our best work as pioneers in uncharted territory (see www.pku.com). Key to our success has been early partnership with our clients’ medical / legal / regulatory (MLR) teams. People support what they help to create. Early concept reviews help to:

• Provide insights that can put your marketing program on a path to “approvability”.
• Save time and budget dollars that would otherwise be spent on creating potentially troublesome program elements.
• Minimize costly rounds of review.
• Foster a relationship of trust and collaboration with your MLR board that makes them want to find ways to help your program succeed.

Whether we’re sharing a strategy deck, storyboards, wireframes or an interactive prototype – at Compass, we believe early support from MLR is essential to successful innovation.

I was first introduced to the use of behavioral targeting in Gmail. For anyone who uses Gmail I’m sure you are familiar with the column of paid search ads running down the right side of your conversations. One day, I noticed that the ads for beach house rentals was particularly relevant to an email exchange with my friends over our pending long weekend at the beach. The coincidence stumped me for a moment, but then the realization came. Gmail was using keywords in the text of my conversation to display relevant and targeted paid search ads to me. And if this was momentarily baffling for me, it must be for others not so internet savvy, especially when it is used in display advertising and not in something as obviously personal as Gmail. So when I stumbled across the recent New York Times article discussing a new icon meant to inform consumers about the use of behavioral targeting I felt compelled to put fingers to keyboard.

The use of targeted ads is on the rise. Government criticism to the practice is becoming louder. More and more consumers are questioning the “why” behind the ads that they are seeing. A little icon, an “i”, developed by the advocacy group, the Future of Privacy Forum, is supposed to help. The idea was to create a symbol that would become as synonymous to information about targeted ads, as the three-arrowed triangle is to recycling. The “i”, within a circle on a blue background, will direct users to a page explaining how their web history and demographic profile was used to determine that they would see this particular ad.¹

More marketers plan to utilize behavioral targeting in their media buys, but face resistance over using that data from consumers and the government. In a recent eMarketer report, it was estimated that behaviorally targeted advertising is expected to rise at a steady growth rate of approximately 20% year over year from 2009 to 2014, topping off at $2.6 billion in 2014.² Marketers view behavioral targeting as an effective way to cut through the ad clutter that consumers are increasingly getting bogged down with and therefore have a tendency to ignore. The “i” is meant to be an important step towards making consumers and the government more comfortable with the practice.

So what does it all mean? For marketers, as the use of the “i” becomes more ubiquitous, creative will need to be developed or adapted to accommodate the symbol (and creative folks will need to get used to a little icon interfering with their aesthetic). Education will need to be given to clients and to other internal stakeholders within their organization, about it and what it means. Also, it’s yet to be determined if the web page explaining the “i” and the use of behavioral targeting will be a standard link, or if each company will be responsible for developing and hosting their own page.

It’s still debatable whether or not all consumers will embrace targeted advertising as it grows in usage. Providing an informational tool to increase the transparency between consumers and advertisers is certainly a good step, but I have to question if it will truly alleviate any unease that some consumers may feel at having examples of their captured behavior staring them in the face. Personal privacy, especially online, is a growing concern for many. For every user that doesn’t like it, I’m sure there will be many others who already do welcome targeted ads and will continue to welcome them even more as they grow in prominence. If you have little control over the fact that you will see advertising online, almost equivalent to the amount of control you have over exposure to television ads, why not embrace ones that will be much more meaningful to you?

In my opinion this is a win-win for both consumers and advertisers. At the very least, targeted ads will translate to increased brand awareness, if not click through rates, while consumers will be exposed to new products, services or messages that are much more meaningful to them.

1. Clifford, Stephanie. “A Little ‘i’ to Teach About Online Privacy.” New York Times 26 January. 2010. Media & Advertising. 2 February. 2010
2. “Privacy Restrictions May Open Ad Targeting Doors.” eMarketer 1 February. 2010. eMarketer Daily. 2 February. 2010

It may seem like an uphill battle. How could a patient change the way a physician prescribes? Believe me, I’ve heard it many times before. “We don’t focus on patients,” and “Our only real target is physicians – patients don’t matter.” Really? That sounds like a great strategy – for 1997. Let’s keep up with the times, people. Consumers are hungry for information. It doesn’t matter what the category. My dad used to choose whatever the local mechanic recommended, but now he won’t even buy a new headlight without searching ratings, reviews, and shopping engines. People want to be fully informed before making a decision. Show me the CARFAX!

So why would we think healthcare is any different? People want to make the right decision when it comes to health and safety, and they will do the research. So why fight it? It isn’t hard to give people what they want. It doesn’t require a multi-million dollar ad campaign. You just have to be there when they are looking for you (even if they don’t know they are looking for you).

1-800-flowers can run commercials all day long and I may never feel the need to order flowers. However, a search ad is very likely to get my attention when it appears for the term “same day flower delivery” on October 7th (my Mom’s birthday). This is exactly how it works in pharma. Consumers develop symptoms/are diagnosed/need a refill and immediately start searching. These are the opportunities you must pounce on. They are looking for you. They want your help.

Encourage them to seek diagnosis. Prompt them to ask questions. Help them save money.

If you don’t, your competitor will. I have a great case study, but first something I stumbled upon while writing this post. I asked a coworker to pick a random disease and then I started searching. “how can I stay awake?” “narcolepsy treatment.” “ghb coupon.”All roads should have led to Xyrem. But they didn’t. They led to Nuvigil. Even a search for “xyrem coupon” led me to Nuvigil. The icing on the cake – Xyrem.com won an eHealthcare Leadership Award in 2008 for “best website.” People want to be empowered, and they will use the tools you make for them. But only if they can find them…having a great site does nothing for you if people can’t find it!

Let’s get back to my original question. Can patients influence prescribing habits? Well, I work with a smaller brand in a marketplace dominated by several blockbuster drugs. This smaller brand can’t afford a big consumer campaign, but they do make sure they reach the right people at the right time. Year after year they continue to prove that smart paid and organic search campaigns get results. Results that are driven by patient requests. Patient requests for a brand that those patients had never heard of before they started searching.

This brand dominates natural search, continually being the only brand on the first page for key disease-state terms. This natural search presence plus a strategic paid search campaign has resulted in highly qualified patient traffic that continues to increase every year. More than 20% of their traffic in 2009 printed a coupon and 30% of those prints were redeemed. Need more proof? The brand did a 3rd party study and found this interesting stat:

In 2009, 10% of their prescriptions were driven by patient requests.

Not bad for the annual cost of a handful of sales reps.