Introduction by Dee Dao, President of the FOBIP Alumni Network warming up the audience at Mt. Sinai School of Medicine

The event kicked off with an introduction by the moderator Sarah Webb, a journalist for the Webb of Science. She briefly touched on the issues of our new digital age, in which many people are communicating with each other in 140 characters, or less. She mentioned the issues such as freedom of speech and government regulation in the biotech/pharma industry, discussed the ways in which people interact with healthcare companies online, and gave examples of successful early adapters of online communications strategies in medicine. She asked what do customers want, as they get their information from the internet? Today 61% of people are getting their health information online, according to a Pew study. However, only 1/2 of those people are generating content i.e. posting to blogs, commenting in forums, or contributing to discussions in an online community.

This was followed by a fantastic presentation by Michelle Hoffmann, Senior Research Manager at Deloitte Research. There is alot of buzz around social networks, there was even a movie about it- it is on everyone’s agenda. Every kid is doing it, you probably do it yourself. But, is there value in it? It’s actually very hard to make money from social media. Clients asked Deloitte: If we use this, will we find value? Deloitte answered by doing research on social networks, which is actually different than social media. What should life science networks be thinking about? How can life science companies engage in this to find value? Michelle admitted that there is hype, and there is hope. Does anyone want to ‘friend’ a company? No. The system works on the premise of data collection and collaboration between administrators and users. Does social marketing improve brand? The jury is still out. She repeated the mantra “If you build it, they will not come”. Recommend that you don’t advertise- it often doesn’t work. There are many options: blogs, wiki’s, RapidFeed, i.e. microblog such as twitter. Focused communities are rising where people come together for a single interest or event. There are more people on Facebook than the entire United States. There is alot of hype. Why are Life Sciences clients interested in this? They are interested because patients are going online to find relevant information to achieve some sort of healthcare outcome, and these networks are consumer/patient driven. There are possibilities for physicians to come enter and interact, possibly for-profit operations. 60% of doctors are using social networking for professional purposes. Social networking is most commonly being used by patients and their families, especially those fighting cancer and childhood diseases. However, obesity treatment via weight loss has not seen any significant social network activity due to the “on again, off again” nature of the therapy.

There are many different methods for collecting information, so why choose social netoworks? Owning or running a social network can give the administrator a curated database of information unavailable to them from other sources or databases. Some of the strengths of using social networking include: Collect Information- Market research, competetive intelligence Communicate- Social networks rely on “pull in” information, opposed to the traditional communications strategy of “push out”

There are social networks where physicians can actually exchange information in an online community, such as Ozmosis which bills itself as “The Trusted Physician’s Network, where good doctors go to become great doctor”s). In Sermo, a “Forum to share latest medical insights for physicians”, physicians remain anonymous. 23% of physicians plan on using social networking in the next 12-18 mo. However, it does take alot of blood, sweat and tears and manpower to get a social network running and keeping it up to date. It is not like a static web page, which can just be set up and the owner walks away. Deloitte recommends to those life science companies interested in setting up social networks to hire a very experienced moderator. People use social networking for many reasons, i.e. recreational and transactional purposes. The transactional user will need a review for a product or advice in a scenario. For example, their baby has a fever, what do they do? This is where physicians and consumers can come in and interact. Deloitte has been showing their life science clients that there’s value in social networking. For example, SpineConnect allows “spine surgeons from around the world log-on to SpineConnect to share knowledge, develop novel approaches to treatment, address the top challenges in spine healthcare, and create technological solutions that address voids in the current marketplace with the underlying goal of improving patient outcomes”. Finally, Michelle stated that she felt social network’s strength was in up-to-date information on topics that are filled with uncertainty.

Thank you to our attentive and diverse audience!

Louise Clemens, a digital strategy consultant explained that pharma wants to use social networking, but are very afraid to. She focused on what is working now. Elsevier Publishing is currently using this platform to allow editors to engage in conversation, and interact directly with their advisory board. The American College for Gastroenterology, via their ACG GI Circle has set up a system where members can participate in the conversation by commenting on abstracts and following authors- a great way to cultivate information and keep the scientific discussion going past an initial meeting at a conference.

There were some very interesting topics brought up during the final discussion. It was noted that the Mayo Clinic has over 300 videos up on YouTube. The FDA represents the large unknown in this sector. While they have no official social networking guidelines in place yet for the industry, the FDA themselves is publishing alot of content online via social networks. In 2010 the FDA issued 52 warning letters to the pharmaceutical industry, but only one involved social media. That was a Google Ad for a drug, which was faulted for not providing the proper warnings and side effects for the product with its advertisement. Johnson & Johnson has been very successful in opening up dialogue with patients and customers via their social media team, which responds to the individual questions submitted via their social network online (See J&J Diabetes Institute Online Community). Remember to never launch on a Friday. And finally, the future of this field will probably lie in location based sites such as Groupon, Foursquare and MyCityWay.

The evening ended with a fun and lively networking session which had food and drinks provided by the FOBIP.

Integrating personalized health care into clinical practice

Organized by:
Fundamentals of the Bioscience Industry Program: Alumni Network Executive Committee
NY State Center for Biotechnology
Mount Sinai School of Medicine

Date: Thursday, December 2nd, 2010 at 6:30pm

Location: Mount Sinai School of Medicine, Icahn Medical Institute
1425 Madison Avenue (@ 98th St.), 1st Floor Seminar room

Abstract

The pursuit of personalized medicine continues to transform biomedical research and innovation from the bench to the bedside. Fundamentals of the Bioscience Industry Program (FOBIP) Alumni Network Executive Committee‘s Personalized Medicine Seminar brings together a clinical scientist and two healthcare experts to discuss, debate and identify the current challenges and opportunities for the development of a personalized approach to medicine and healthcare. They will provide perspective from the different participants of the healthcare industry and offer insights into this promising area of medical research.

Panelists

Paul Chapman, MD, Professor of Medicine of Weill Medical College and Graduate School of Medical Sciences, and Attending Physician of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, and Memorial Hospital for Cancer and Allied Diseases. His research interests include the evaluation of drugs that target the genetic mutations in melanoma cells.

Mark Horn, MD, MPH, Chief Medical Officer of Target Health, Inc., and Senior Advisor to Avalere Health. Prior to joining Target Health, Dr. Horn spent 25 years at Pfizer Inc., leading teams in Licensing & Development, Medical Marketing in multiple therapeutic areas, and Worldwide Public Affairs and Policy.

Glen Park, PharmD, Senior Director Clinical and Regulatory Affairs of Target Health, Inc. Dr. Park has over 20 years of extensive regulatory affairs and clinical development experience acquired in industry – Aventis Pharma, Ingenix Pharmaceuticals, and Sankyo Pharma, and academic settings – University of Iowa and University of Toledo.

Moderator

Eric Vieira, PhD, Assistant Director of the Office of Technology & Business Development of the Mount Sinai Medical Center, and Course Director of the Fundamentals of the Bioscience Industry Program.

Agenda: 6:30 pm − 8:00 pm Panel Discussion (networking reception to follow)

By Adebanke Fagbemi

There is an ever-increasing shift towards personalized medicine in the fields of medicine and biotech. This is no surprise because, although it has long been known that individuals respond differently to drugs or treatment, it has only more recently come to light that subtle differences in our genetic make up may be responsible. The idea that our genetic profiles could be used to predict not just our susceptibility to disease, but also our response to treatment, holds obvious enticement to the biotech and healthcare industry. This is evident in two recent news stories. First, it recently came to light that the drug Erbitux® which is used to treat colo-rectal, head and neck cancers, is uneffective in colon cancer patients with mutations in the KRAS gene. As a result, the two companies that market Erbitux® (ImClone and Bristol-Myers Squibb), re-labeled it to discourage patients with these mutations from using it. The idea being to hopefully protect such patients from long, expensive, unnecessary treatments, and unpleasant side effects associated with treatment. It would also, truth be told, protect the companies from potential lawsuits that could result.

In a slightly different, though equally important vein, a New England Journal of Medicine article published in the July 9 issue, reports the results of a clinical trial showing that the new PARP inhibitor Olaparib, is effective in treating breast, ovarian, and prostate cancers in patients with mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. This is an important finding, as this drug elicits significantly milder side effects than conventional chemotherapy, and its side effects were easily reversed by lowering dosage, as shown in the study. With the human genome sequenced, information from genetic profiles of individuals will ultimately aid healthcare professionals in patient treatment, allowing doctors to better prescribe drugs, and dose accordingly. The information provided on susceptibility to diseases such as cancer will allow patients along with their healthcare professionals to monitor disease status, and when possible, maybe even prevent it.

When discussing this issue, however, there is the other side of the story. Once all this genetic information becomes available and easily accessible, what are the disadvantages? I can think of a major one – health insurance. With all the recent talk of health insurance and health care, imagine what would happen if the insurance companies were to get a hold of genetic profiles of potential customers. This would provide them with good reasons for refusing coverage to patients with certain susceptibilities. Forget “pre-existing conditions” when “potential conditions” come into play! Any and everyone could become a victim.

All in all, there is a lot to be gained from personalized medicine, as long as genetic information is handled with care. If drugs and treatment are like the saying “one man’s meat is another man’s poison”, then isn’t it essential that doctors be provided information to prevent them from treating patient A with a drug that, although effective in patient B, could be deleterious to patient A?  Maybe my genetic profile could finally explain why Nyquil® keeps me wide awake at night, leaving me drowsy and groggy all of the next day, even though it’s marketed as giving you “the best sleep you ever got with a cold medicine”!