InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

SonamKapoor

10/19/18 11:30 AM

#150831 RE: smarterer #150820

Thanks, Smart

I've seen higher total annual scripts referenced as I mentioned, so I kinda figured same as IRI or Nielsen for other industries, but wanted to be sure.

Awesome that Sam posts that. That kind of data is very $$$.
icon url

north40000

10/19/18 11:57 AM

#150840 RE: smarterer #150820

In a patent infringement case I was "involved" in many years ago, validity of a patent covering one very commercial composition was in issue. Evidence bearing on the commercial success of that compound in the market place was in issue--evidence of commercial success(particularly unexpected commercial success)--was treated as evidence of the non-obviousness of the composition under 35 U.S.C. 103.

I saw 2 experts testify, one testifying on behalf of plaintiff owning the patent, the other testifying on behalf of the entity accused of infringing the patent. The relative accuracy of data from IMS, Symphony, and even Opera was the subject of testimony from both that occupied much of the day, with both experts ultimately forced to agree that the source of the data base each was arguing was more relevant was not necessarily complete itself.
icon url

sts66

10/19/18 2:08 PM

#150892 RE: smarterer #150820

Symphony and IMS canvas certain numbers of pharmacies and managed care facilities, then make computer models to extrapolate actual TRx and NRx, and they're accurate to within a few percent most of the time. Even AMRN uses these estimates in their quarterly reports, it's the best data available - AMRN knows how much V they sold, but they can't know if some patients are taking 4 g/day every day, or take a lower dose.