Objective 1
Uncover HCP reactions to blinded product profiles to gain insight into how specific aspects of the described treatments impact their prescribing habits
To prepare for the upcoming launch of their product, our client wanted to assess specific elements of their label and messaging in their target product profile (TPP) to understand the potential impacts of this information on HCP decision-making in the treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis
Uncover HCP reactions to blinded product profiles to gain insight into how specific aspects of the described treatments impact their prescribing habits
Identify key differences between profiles and compare HCP interest, excitement, and willingness to use the client treatment and competitors (in-market and pre-market)
The inVibe Solution
inVibe’s Target Product Profile solution allowed our pharmaceutical client to quickly and efficiently deploy a mixed-methods (quant + voice) study to understand how HCPs react to different TPPs and determine how market changes could affect future prescribing behaviors.
Within a few days, inVibe screened and recruited 50 HCPs who treat patients with moderate to severe psoriasis to complete a mixed methods study. All HCPs initially completed a brief quantitative survey; immediately followed by a subset (n=20) who participated in an automated phone interview, responding to questions simply by speaking.

Please refer back to the Product X profile, an oral product in-development for moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. Imagine you are speaking to a colleague who also manages moderate and severe psoriasis patients. How would you describe Product X to your colleague and what makes it different from other treatments currently available for psoriasis?
Let’s look at another oral hypothetical product profile – Profile J, and imagine you’re speaking to that same colleague again. How would you describe Profile J and what makes it different from other treatments currently available for psoriasis?
Reviewing Profile J in greater depth, what are your overall thoughts and reactions to the specific information around the safety of Profile J? Which of these elements has the largest impact, either positive or negative, on your perception and anticipated use? Why?
Continuing to think about Profile J and Profile X how, if at all, would your intended use of the treatment differ between the two profiles? Why? And what additional information would help you increase your comfort in prescribing it?
inVibe’s analysts leveraged their language expertise and advanced NLP tools to process, evaluate, and analyze multiple aspects of each response, including content, language, and emotion derived from speech-emotion recognition, allowing for deeper insights, faster.
The client received an interactive online dashboard with quantitative and voice data, transcripts, and detailed analytical readouts for each profile. inVibe’s analysts walked the team through the insights, tying every recommendation to specific physician comments.

Used TPP feedback to prepare launch messaging that addresses safety questions head-on.
The product launched with proactive risk communication, helping HCPs have better safety conversations and preventing concerns that could have slowed uptake.
Insights & Next Steps
Based on the insights, inVibe recommended that the team take strategic actions.
Message HCPs on best practices around monitoring for and managing potential adverse events associated with the treatment to reduce uncertainty and assuage concerns that decreased anticipated usage of other therapies whose TPPs include more expansive safety warnings.
Leverage long-term data, favorable KOL opinions, and continue to educate on MOA differentiation to enhance comfort with the client’s treatment.