Work worth doing: FormularyDecisions
Laurie Fazio, Head of FormularyDecisions Market Access Solutions & Growth Strategies, Xcenda
FormularyDecisions, a secure, closed, online platform that facilitates bi-directional information exchange with registered and verified US payers and healthcare decision-makers (HCDMs)
FormularyDecisions provides access to 2,500+ US decision-makers from more than 900 healthcare organizations actively involved in reviewing products for formulary considerations
Q: What impact has technology had on information exchange with payers?
Laurie Fazio: As a technology-based platform, FormularyDecisions has streamlined the information exchange by enabling US payers/HCDMs to engage with various manufacturers and their product information in one closed, secure, and centralized platform. Subscribing manufacturers benefit from increased awareness of the availability of this information and ongoing activity metrics and feedback to better inform, adjust, and refine their market access strategies and tactics.
Q: How has increased access to data improved information exchange with payers?
LF: Metrics provide insight into how US payers/HCDMs are engaging with information on the platform, and an integrated survey enables US payers/HCDMs to provide feedback on product perceptions, information gaps, formulary considerations, and more. This level of information exchange drives a more positive and productive engagement between manufacturers and US payers/HCDMs.
Q: How does the current payer landscape impact your recommended approach to information exchange?
LF: Based on feedback from payers over the last decade, the FormularyDecisions platform has evolved from solely a dossier repository to dedicated disease and product pages and an exclusive space for manufacturers and payers to share additional information that is compliant with Pre-approval Information Exchange (PIE) guidelines right through launch.
Q: As more complex therapies enter the market, how does information exchange with payers need to evolve?
LF: Payers are evaluating products earlier, including the development of budget forecasts. Manufacturers need an effective PIE strategy in place to support this engagement. They should also be leveraging feedback that helps to inform their launch strategies.
Q: How has COVID-19 and the resulting rise in virtual/digital interaction changed your approach to information exchange with payers?
LF: The pandemic drove an exponential increase in digital interactions, which led all stakeholders, including payers, to adapt their processes to a virtual environment. We plan to continue to enhance the digital information exchange so payers can leverage the platform to access the information they need. While we expect some “normalization” once live interactions are resumed, feedback from our community is that a digital platform truly supplements their evaluations and engagements.
Q: How does FormularyDecisions “pay off" in terms of product success?
LF: There are two huge payoffs to investing in FormularyDecisions: First, it gives manufacturers—large and small—the opportunity to increase brand awareness across more than 2,500 US decision-makers from more than 900 healthcare organizations. Second, it offers metrics and payer feedback that enable manufacturers to refine their commercialization strategy and engage with potential partners.
Q: What other commercialization services integrate well with information exchange with payers?
LF: Many payers on the platform are looking for real-world evidence. Xcenda can help manufacturers develop an evidence portfolio that proves product value and meets the evidentiary standards of payers.
Q: What are some of the biggest mistakes manufacturers make when it comes to information exchange with payers?
LF: The four biggest mistakes manufacturers make are: (1) not taking advantage of the ability to strategically contribute content on the FormularyDecisions platform to sustain and enhance payer engagement; (2) failing to listen to payer feedback and use data insights to adapt their commercialization strategy; (3) not treating their online dossier as an interactive e-document to promote timely information exchange with payers, both pre- and post-approval; and (4) not recognizing the impact ICER reports have on decision making.