CASE STUDY – AUGUST 27, 2020
Medical Affairs Three-Part Session, Oncology
A medical affairs team wanted to engage a group of hematology and oncology specialists to gather insight on various topics around a rare type of cancer.
The team had several objectives, including:
- Obtain feedback on FDA-approved label for the disease, and understand the potential impact on clinical practice
- Understand current treatment practices for management of the disease, and impact of a specific drug’s placement in clinical practice guidelines
- Understand what meaningful clinical benefit looks like for the disease
- Discuss the evolving role of pathology reports and molecular profiling
- Learn which data from recent medical congress events is most interesting to meeting participants
The team used Within3 to hold a three-part session, beginning with a one-hour kickoff webcast to review key data and set expectations for the next part of the meeting. After the kickoff webcast, the team launched a two-week over-time session.
Approximately half of the questions were open during the first week of the session, with the remaining questions released in the second week. Questions included What is your experience with or impression of the safety profile of certain drugs used to treat this type of cancer? and How are you evaluating response to certain therapies in your patients? For some questions, resources such as PDFs were available in a secure viewer, so participants could review and consider before responding.
After the conclusion of the two-week over-time session, a closing webcast provided the opportunity for participants to review areas of consensus and probe for more details.
Session moderators were highly engaged throughout the over-time session, and 100% of the contracted participants contributed to the discussion. The team met its stated objectives for the session, and collected key learnings about the over-time approach:
- Using the over-time approach provided participants the opportunity to be more thoughtful in their responses and work around their existing schedules
- Participants who preferred the over-time format to face-to-face advisory boards reported they were able to think more clearly about their comments and more thoroughly consider their colleagues’ remarks
- The phased approach to questions felt less cumbersome and was well-paced