If you would like more information, or would like to get hold of this report, please use contact details below.

Contact: Alex Wyke     Email: report@patient-view.com   Website: http://www.patient-view.com

About this report

London, Tuesday 18th October 2016. This report is based on the findings of a PatientView November 2015-January 2016 survey exploring the views of 280  patient groups with an interest in cancer. These patient groups came from 57 countries (28 of the 280 were based in the USA). The report provides feedback (from the perspective of  these patient groups) on the corporate reputation of the pharma industry during 2015, as well as on the performance of  31 pharma companies at six key indicators that influence corporate reputation. The 2015 results are compared with those from cancer patient groups in 2014 and 2013 (and with those from across all therapy areas in the 2015 survey).

For the purposes of this report, the phrase ‘corporate reputation’ is defined as the extent to which pharma companies are meeting the expectations of patients and patient groups.

"Everything is not really bad, but the demands to do good and to act with integrity are greater than ever, and the industry continues to duck and weave, rather than really address the issues. It spends a lot of time trying to manage its image. No company can ‘afford’ to be transparent unless the whole industry is. Even with scrutiny, companies find means to avoid being transparent. I don’t think that companies are acting with flagrant disregard for patients, or with any malevolent intentions, but it is such a competitive environment, and there is a total war between companies.”

—National Canada-based patient group specialising in rare diseases (including rare cancers)

INDUSTRY-WIDE FINDINGS

The 280 patient groups with an interest in cancer and responding to the 2015 ‘Corporate Reputation of Pharma’ survey were more positive about the pharma industry’s corporate reputation than patient groups from many other therapeutic conditions, and significantly more so than in the previous years.

• 44% of the 280 patient groups with an interest in  cancer and responding to the 2015 ‘Corporate Reputation of Pharma’ survey stated that the pharma industry as a whole had an “Excellent” or “Good” corporate reputation that year. In 2014, the equivalent figure was 37.4%. For patient groups from across all therapy areas in 2015, the figure was  44.7%.
• Patient groups with an interest in cancer ranked the pharma industry 5th out of 8 healthcare-industry sectors for corporate reputation in 2015—ahead of generics, for-profit, and not-for-profit health insurers. Pharma also ranked 5th in 2015’s global results.

Several reasons account for the rise in pharma’s approval ratings among cancer patient groups, not least the continued belief by the majority of these patient groups that pharma is “Excellent” or “Good” at supplying high-quality, useful products.

As a national Canadian breast-cancer patient group noted: “Our organisation represents the breast-cancer patient community, and, while there are mixed views on pharma within this community, we have noticed that the overall view of patients towards pharma has improved. Many patients have accessed new medications.” It should be noted, however, that patient groups from other therapeutic areas were even more positive in 2015 about pharma’s ability to provide high-quality products.

Between 2014-2015, the most-improved elements of pharma’s corporate reputation reported by cancer patient groups were:

• Pharma’s ability to manage adverse news about products;
• Ethical marketing practices by pharma; and
• Improved patient access to clinical trials.

HOW PHARMA COULD DO BETTER,

SAY CANCER PATIENT GROUPS ...

The responses and comments received from the 280 cancer patient indicate several areas in which pharma could improve:

• More than one-in-five cancer patient groups believe that the single most-important strategy a pharma company could adopt to improve its corporate reputation is a fair pricing policy .
• Several cancer patient groups single out the need for improved standards and transparency in clinical trials.
• A reduction in the bureaucracy that can often be found among pharma, and which hampers its chances of creating positive patient-group relations.
• The need for greater support for patient groups from pharma in the drive to promote health literacy among patients with cancer.

HOW INDIVIDUAL PHARMA COMPANIES PERFORMED FOR CORPORATE REPUTATION AMONG PATIENT GROUPS WITH AN INTEREST IN CANCER, 2015

END OF STATEMENT

PatientView is a UK-based research organisation that consults closely with patient groups, and publicises the work of the patient-advocacy movement.