Latest News

AdobeStock_1062787794_Editorial_Use_Only-1200x800.png
DTC News

Navigating a Cookieless Future: What Pharma Marketers Need to Know

February 28, 2025 0

Although Google delayed the full phase-out of third-party cookies in Chrome, the digital marketing landscape is still evolving toward a cookieless future. Pharma marketers should utilize this time to refocus on first-party data activation as third-party cookies become less relevant and less reliable.

The 2024 Adobe Cookieless Research Report found that nearly half of the potential market already resides in cookieless environments. However, many marketers remain unprepared.

With Safari and Firefox blocking cookies, pharma marketers must adapt. Here are a few ideas on how:

  • Implement Server-Side Tracking Workarounds
    • Use server-side tracking methods, such as Meta’s first-party server-side solution, to bypass cookie-blocking and directly collect and share data.
  • Double Down on First-Party and Zero-Party Data
    • Leverage zero- and first-party data from sources like patient portals, surveys, and HCP platforms (e.g., Doximity and VuMedi). This data is opt-in and more reliable for personalized marketing efforts.
  • Leverage Google’s Cookieless Tools
    • Take advantage of Google Analytics 4 (GA4), Privacy Sandbox, and Tracking Protection to gather insights and serve relevant, privacy-compliant ads.
  • Push Vendors for Cookieless Solutions
    • Ensure third-party vendors, such as ad tech providers, offer privacy-compliant solutions like Unified ID 2.0 and consent management platforms (CMPs) for collecting and storing consent.
  • Shift to Contextual Targeting
    • Adopt contextual targeting to serve ads based on content relevance, bypassing cookies and addressing privacy concerns. It’s more cost-effective and less intrusive.
  • Test and Optimize New Tools
    • Use the remaining months with cookies to experiment with alternative methods like contextual targeting and emerging tools from Google. Optimize for interoperability across platforms.
  • Utilize AI and Cross-Platform Data Modeling
    • Use AI to improve cross-platform data modeling and real-time adjustments, even without cookies. This will help pharma marketers track engagement and make better decisions faster.
  • Prepare for Attribution Changes
    • Explore incrementality testing and multi-touch attribution models to understand the full impact of your campaigns on long patient or HCP journeys.
  • Build Trust and Focus on Privacy
    • Emphasize privacy transparency in your marketing efforts. With health-related data being extremely sensitive, building trust with patients and healthcare professionals through responsible data handling is key.
  • Leverage Real-World Evidence (RWE)
    • As third-party data becomes harder to collect, turn to real-world evidence (RWE)—patient and provider data that offer actionable insights into patient behavior, treatment patterns, and outcomes.

As the digital landscape shifts, pharma marketers must use this time to adapt. This is the time to embrace change, build trust, and continue delivering targeted, compliant healthcare marketing.

 

Mike D’Orazio

A_conceptual_illustration_representing_the_future_.jpeg
DTC-In-Perspective by Bob Ehrlich

Exploring the Possible

February 20, 2025 0

One of the things we do at DTC Perspectives is speculate on the future of DTC. No time in DTC history has been as uncertain as now with the Kennedy confirmation. One thing we have learned about the second Trump term is nothing can be ruled out.  The idea of incrementalism in policy adjustments is not how he operates.

In past new administrations, we would have been contemplating some possible new DTC guidance tweaking requirements for fair balance. I am afraid we may face a lot more than that under the Kennedy HHS.

Let’s contemplate alternate futures for DTC and the odds of them happening:

  1. Total DTC advertising ban

This would include no promotion of prescription drugs to consumers in any medium. Websites for drugs might be allowed but no promotion, just label information. Of course, this raises constitutional issues, but we have seen the Trump playbook is to act and let the courts rule later. One thing we need to understand is the drug industry could “voluntarily” accept a ban because of other business considerations. Price and drug approval can be used by HHS as pressure points to get drug makers to curtail DTC. The total spending for DTC is low in proportion to total drug sales so how far will drug makers go to protect that minor spending.

No time in DTC history has been as uncertain as now with the Kennedy confirmation.

  1. Partial ban: no branded television

This is what Kennedy would probably be content doing. Many in Congress, insurance payers, and most medical associations would like to see TV banned. I can see DTC television limited to disease education with no brand mention. Again, this is limiting speech, but would drug companies really fight to keep it? Television is about $5 billion in ad spending or only about 1% of drug sales. Drug companies want their drugs approved and not price-controlled, and that is a big stick HHS wields. DTC expenditures would likely be reallocated to other media such as digital, print, point of care, disease education, and PR programs. There are no shortages of companies who are ready to sell non-TV media.

  1. Status quo

The media, ad agencies, and drug companies have lots of influence. They are surely lobbying Congress and The White House not to ban DTC. They can make a strong case that DTC does not cause any public harm and in fact Rx drugs lead to cheaper solutions in disease management. Status quo means there is still a good chance of increased HHS demands for more fair balance and stricter enforcement.

My odds? Total advertising ban: 10%; TV ban: 40%; and status quo: 50%. Why is status quo my highest odds? Kennedy has a lot on his plate to Make America Healthy Again (MAHA). He will need to pick his battles and fighting free speech might be just too much to take on. The $10 billion in DTC is a pittance in America’s $1.4 trillion healthcare system. I think status quo with modifications to make DTC harder to execute is still the most likely approach. The next few months will tell the direction we are heading and make interesting times for all of us DTC practitioners.

Bob Ehrlich

DALL·E-2025-02-14-13.49.20-A-dynamic-collage-representing-Super-Bowl-advertisements.-The-image-features-a-stadium-ba.webp
DTC-In-Perspective by Bob Ehrlich

Super Ads?

February 14, 2025 0

Pharmaceuticals joined the big advertising game in New Orleans, running two :60 spots. They were not ads for a particular brand but were corporate type messaging. Novartis focused on breast cancer in what was a unique creative montage of showing breasts in a myriad of situations both real life and in art. This ad was certainly 180 degrees different from what would be expected in a drug company breast cancer awareness ad. For about 40 of the 60 seconds the theme was just look at the breasts with a musical background saying “I know you are looking.” Actress Hailee Steinfeld was part of the montage.

Then, in the last 20 seconds, a more conventional looking appeal started for diagnosing breast cancer with comedian Wanda Sykes. She encouraged patients to get early detection and treatment. Clearly Novartis wanted to break the mold of the standard disease education ads. They did.

You can’t be boring, and Novartis and Pfizer certainly met that requirement.

Pfizer was also up to the creative task with its highly engaging cancer research ad. Showing a child in a hospital bed who then gets up and parades through the streets in a Rocky-like scene with boxing attire. A super appears saying to cancer that we are going to knock you out. Singer LL Cool J provides the background song. Then the ad closes with a super saying Pfizer is working on drugs for eight different cancer breakthroughs by 2030.

Both ads are excellent in getting the stopping power needed for a Super Bowl entry. You can’t be boring, and Novartis and Pfizer certainly met that requirement. Each ad left you guessing what the ad was for until its last third. This is in keeping with Super Bowl ads in general trying to hook you on a story before revealing the sponsoring brand or company.

Branded drug ads are just not going to work on the Super Bowl. Spending millions on an ad with half devoted to risks and side effects does not make sense. That brings us to a third drug ad, but not from a drug company. Hims & Hers, a direct seller in many drug categories, ran a provocative ad critical of the cost of drugs and saying the health care system is not working for us. The first part of the ad was on obesity disease education; fairly standard stuff. Then the ad tore into the weight loss industry for failed approaches and pharma for high prices. Then it turned to how Hims & Hers has affordable meds made in the USA.

Congress is concerned that companies like Hims & Hers are advertising drugs with no fair balance. Proposed legislation would treat these drug sellers similarly to pharmaceutical companies. After all, they are making drugs through compounding and are trying to diagnose and sell directly. Sounds like a drug maker. Why are they able to compete with drug companies but allowed to eschew fair balance? These compounded drugs carry risks and side effects similar to Wegovy or Zepbound. Hopefully Congress will impose reasonable requirements to add fair balance as these types of direct sellers are booming. The Hims & Hers ad was attention getting and tapped into the concerns consumers have about GLP prices. That said, it is ironic the only Super Bowl drug ad was not from a drug company.

 

Bob Ehrlich

Robert-Kennedy-JR-RFK-shutterstock_2412332767.jpg
DTC-In-Perspective by Bob Ehrlich

Kennedy Will Be Confirmed.

February 11, 2025 0

Robert Kennedy Jr. was favorably voted out of the Senate committee 14-13 on 2/4 and will now go before the full Senate for confirmation. This was the key hurdle passing a divided committee where Sen. Cassidy was the Republican who was the swing vote. Cassidy is a physician who was troubled deeply by Kennedy’s vaccine stance. Yet he voted yes as he was assured that Kennedy will not ban any approved vaccines. Kennedy will almost certainly be confirmed, albeit it narrowly, in the full Senate.

I watched the two days of Kennedy hearings last week. Nothing he said allayed my fears about his feelings toward the pharmaceutical industry. The problem with Mr. Kennedy is his skepticism about many drug treatments. His public attacks mostly have been focused on vaccines but clearly his testimony was anti-prescription drugs.

His most alarming comment was to say prescription drugs are the third leading cause of death in the United States. I will not spend much time refuting this incendiary comment except to say it is grossly misleading. All drug treatment is a benefit / risk assessment and while true serious adverse events can kill people, the overwhelming evidence is benefits far outweighs risks.

He is right that diseases among children have increased the past few decades. No one in public health has objections to his goal of determining why autism, diabetes, food allergies, and ADHD have increased. Perhaps there is an explanation related to diet, food ingredients, pollution, or increased diagnoses. By all means we should allocate public funds to finding out. The problem with Mr. Kennedy is he seems to have already figured it out and his numerous books, speeches, and policy statements say things that are untrue, exaggerated, or based on scant evidence.

His most alarming comment was to say prescription drugs are the third leading cause of death in the United States.

After seeing the speed the Trump team is acting on many policy issues, would a Kennedy HHS be given the go ahead to remake our health care system at warp speed? Would DTC be a casualty of that tear it down approach from Kennedy? While I know we have constitutional protection for business free speech, will Kennedy act anyway to ban DTC and await court challenges?

We can only hope our industry lobbyists can make the case that banning or severely restricting DTC is a bad idea. There are many steps HHS can take short of a total ban including making television harder to execute through new guidances, finding more violative ads, slowing down pre-clearance reviews, and leveraging price negotiations to get companies to “voluntarily” restrict DTC.

I am not expecting Armageddon, but this time the threats feel different. I would be surprised if DTC is not affected in some negative way under the new Kennedy-led HHS.

Bob Ehrlich