Illustrative case study · Healthcare & Life Sciences
Partner A is second at academic centers, and first where uptake starts.
Community and academic specialists who treat adults with Condition Z were the people to ask: a pharma company had to choose which partner drug to take into the pivotal trial for its new agent, and where to start the launch. The researcher interviewed 150 of them, and the company had its report in 14 days.
Illustrative example. The company, scenario, and all figures are fictional. They show UserCue’s method and deliverable format. They do not come from any client study.
The engagement
Illustrative scenariodays, with the report, the data file and a live readout.
Specialists who build combination regimens for adults with Condition Z.
80 in community practice and 70 at academic centers.
Four partners ranked for three adult patient profiles, by setting.
A pharma company
Which partner drug to take into the pivotal trial
Late development, before the pivotal trial
AI-moderated interviews with a ranked, indexed partner choice
Partner preference, adoption timing, reasons for choice
Community and academic specialists treating adults with Condition Z
Headline figures
Partner A’s index at academic centers, just behind Partner B; in community practice it leads at 100
of community specialists would prescribe the Partner A combination within six months of launch
of community specialists choose the partner mainly on drug coverage
The question
Which partner drug goes into the pivotal trial?
The company’s new agent works beside an existing drug, and four partners were on the table. The pivotal trial would fix the partner, and the label would follow the trial, so the launch team needed to know which partner specialists prefer, how soon each setting would start, and why.
Which partner drug do specialists prefer for the new combination?
How soon would community and academic specialists adopt it?
What drives the choice of partner?
What we did
How the study ran, start to finish.
- 1Kickoff
One partner drug for the pivotal trial.
Which partner drug should our new Condition Z agent take into its pivotal trial, and where should the launch start? The kickoff turned it into three questions: which partner specialists prefer, how fast each setting would adopt, and what drives the choice.
- 2Design
Two settings, a four-partner index.
Specialists qualified if they build combination regimens for adults with Condition Z every week: 80 in community practice, 70 at academic centers. For three patient profiles, one with tight drug coverage, each ranked Partners A to D, indexed to the top choice.
- 3Fielding
150 specialists, every switch questioned.
Each specialist responded by voice or text, quant and qual in one conversation, median length 31 minutes; any switch of partner between profiles brought a follow-up asking why. The researcher read all 177 and removed 27 for contradictions or too few patients, leaving 150.
- 4Analysis
Only Partner A ranks high in both settings.
The researcher ran the partner index against practice setting: academic specialists favor Partner B narrowly, while community specialists strongly favor Partner A. Academic centers put B at 100 with A close behind at 88; in community practice B fell to 62, far behind A.
- 5Readout
60% of community specialists would go first.
The launch team’s medical and marketing leads got a live readout from the researcher, who led them through a 28-page report on the partner index, adoption timing and reasons for choice. Partner A went into the pivotal trial, with a community-first launch.
What we found
Four findings from the report.
Partner A holds up in both settings: community specialists strongly prefer it, and academic specialists rank it a close second to Partner B. Drug coverage drives the community choice, and community practice moves first: 60% would prescribe the Partner A combination within six months of launch, against 27% at academic centers.
Partner A leads overall, with Partner B second.
Across three adult patient profiles, specialists ranked four partners for the new agent. Indexed to the top choice, Partner A scores 100 and Partner B 84, with Partners C and D far behind.
Partner index, indexed to 100 · all profiles · n = 150Partner A holds up in both settings, and Partner B slips in community.
Academic centers put Partner B at 100 with Partner A close behind at 88. In community practice Partner A leads at 100 and Partner B falls to 62. Only Partner A stays near the top in both settings.
Community specialists would start first.
60% of community specialists would prescribe the new agent with Partner A within six months of launch, against 27% at academic centers, where many wait for guideline updates. Across all 150 specialists, 45% would start in that window.
Would prescribe within six months of launch · n = 150Coverage drives the choice in community practice.
Drug coverage is the main reason for 38% of specialists, and for 51% in community practice against 23% at academic centers. At academic centers, 36% name outcome data first, the measure on which Partner B leads.
Main reason for the partner chosen · single select · n = 150“Partner B has the better data, and I would use it in a perfect world. In my practice I need the one my patients can actually get covered.”Community specialist · Illustrative quote
Illustrative quotes
Three themes behind the numbers.
“When the plan covers it from launch, I start. When I have to fight for approval, my patients wait and so do I.”
“For my patients the strongest outcome data wins. I would wait for the guidelines before I change how I combine.”
“Once the payers put it on formulary, I would try it within a few months, starting with patients new to combination therapy.”
What the pharma company did
Three moves made with the report.
Took Partner A into the pivotal trial.
The clinical team weighed the index with its earlier trial data and paired the new agent with Partner A, the only partner near the top in both settings.
Put community practice first.
Launch planning starts with community practice, where 60% of specialists would prescribe the Partner A combination within six months.
Started payer work before launch.
Payer and formulary work for the combination starts early, since coverage drives the partner choice for half of community specialists.
Illustrative example. The company, scenario, and all figures are fictional. They show UserCue’s method and deliverable format. They do not come from any client study.
Bring us your next launch question.
A senior researcher designs and presents every study.
Talk to our teamMore healthcare & life sciences studies