By Jamie Doggett Using CREATION Pinpoint, we’ve been tracking HCPs conversations about emerging Alzheimer’s treatments since 2023. For lecanemab, one of these medications indicated for the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease, concerns about small efficacy gains, side effects and cost have been part of the online discourse throughout that period.
At each spike in conversation, often aligned with the publication of trial results or a regulatory decision, there have been some HCPs praising lecanemab and keenly anticipating its arrival. However, there has been a significant level of caution towards, sometimes even disapproval of the use of lecanemab.
Tracking this online HCP conversation, there were early warning signs that the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) may not recommend the treatment for use on the NHS and that HCPs would likely approve of this decision should it come.
The 22nd August was an important day for lecanemab. Following a “thorough review of the benefits and risks” of the medicine, the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) approved lecanemab as a treatment for the early stages of Alzheimer’s disease in the UK.
However, on the same day NICE published draft guidance not recommending lecanemab for use on the NHS because it “is not a cost effective use of limited NHS funding”.
NICE’s recommendation followed “analysis of clinical trial evidence and … cost of treatment”, their conclusion being there were “relatively small benefits” meaning it “cannot be considered good value for the taxpayer”.
We followed two different sets of responses after the news broke – that of news media and that of healthcare professionals using social media. The day after the announcements the Daily Mail led their front page with “Fury as dementia drug denied to patients on NHS”, while the Daily Express went with “Why is it only rich can get Alzeihmer’s wonder drug?”. While using a different tone to the news media, Alzheimer’s Society also responded saying the decision was “disappointing and will be disheartening”.
In contrast, healthcare professionals who posted on social media about the decision came out backing the NICE recommendation. To put the decision in context, HCPs across the UK discussed themes around benefit and risk of the drug.
These included a post from Radiology Registrar Dr Sinha about lecanemab’s unknown or possibly inferior cognitive performance against the current standard of care. As some HCPs discussed the known side effects, Dr Sinha also observed the extra demand on healthcare this would drive.
Dr Shibley Rahman, who in a number of posts defended the “rational and sensible” NICE decision, questioned why social care, GP access and “much needed reform” to NHS continuing health care were not being discussed by those who were questioning the decision to not spend NHS funds on lecanemab.
Following one thread in which a healthcare data scientist gave evidence behind the NICE decision, Andy White, a Chief Pharmacist, said he was “astonished it was licensed on such marginal gains”.
These HCP worries about efficacy, safety and cost did not only appear following the NICE decision as a way to show their approval – they had been present for years prior.
Tracking the HCP online voice as you plan your market access strategy can make all the difference. One CREATION.co client, for example, learned from HCP discussions prior to launch that their scientific messaging was not getting through. They were able to refine their communication and support a successful launch.
If you would like to hear more about tracking the HCP online conversation, particularly to help with launch preparedness, you can contact us at: [email protected].
