Published
Share:
Paul leads the Evaluate’s consulting and analytics business, overseeing strategic advisory engagements across portfolio strategy, asset strategy, competitive intelligence, forecasting, valuation, and BD&L, working with clients across the global pharma and biotech ecosystem.
Paul brings extensive experience spanning academic research and life sciences consulting, supporting organizations ranging from early-stage biotech companies to large pharmaceutical corporate strategy teams. His work focuses on helping clients make evidence-based decisions across the product lifecycle, from pipeline prioritization through to commercial strategy and investment decision-making.
In this series, Evaluate’s consultants discuss some of the key challenges that face the companies they work with across the pharma space. In this interview, Paul Verdin, SVP, Head of Consulting & Analytics, shares his perspective on what makes a good Target Product Profile, why it matters so early in development, and how pressure testing can help companies make more confident portfolio and investment decisions.
At a basic level, a Target Product Profile is a blueprint for what you want a product in development to become. It sets out an aspirational vision, but it must be rooted in reality. A good TPP describes a product that could get to market, be used in practice, and make commercial sense. It can’t be a fairytale.
It matters because it gives development a clear direction. If you are designing a clinical trial, you need to know what you are designing it for. The TPP sets that end point. Without it, teams can end up making decisions without a shared understanding of what success actually looks like.
The short answer is as early as possible. In discovery or very early preclinical work there is always a lot of uncertainty, especially with novel mechanisms. But the TPP really starts to matter around the pre IND stage, when companies begin to formalize their clinical strategy.
At that point, teams need a clear sense of how the program might unfold and what the product needs to demonstrate to succeed. The TPP provides that structure. It’s also worth remembering that it should evolve over time as new data come in. A good TPP is a living document, particularly when you’re dealing with a new mechanism, for example.
Without a TPP, it is hard to know what you are really investing in. Every development program carries risk, but different assets carry very different types of risk. And different companies and investors have different appetites for that risk.
One TPP might describe a first in class therapy where the biology itself is unproven. Another might focus on improving convenience for an established mechanism, such as less frequent dosing. Both are valid approaches, but they rely on different assumptions. The TPP forces those assumptions to be made explicit and brings the clinical and commercial perspectives together. For a new mechanism, you’re probably looking at how you build something that beats the standard of care, while for a convenient dosing you need to understand if there is actually a market for that.
Objectivity is the biggest one. Teams are understandably close to their assets and invested in their success. That can make it difficult to step back and ask whether a product would genuinely change practice. Essentially, you need to know if your baby is ugly!
External perspectives are crucial here. Input from prescribers and payers can highlight gaps between internal expectations and real-world requirements. A TPP can look strong on paper, but if doctors say they wouldn’t prescribe it for one reason or another, you’ve got a problem. All the key elements of drug development appear in a TPP and it’s important not to get locked into a thought process.
This is where Evaluate’s team can add a lot of value. Not only are we really well-connected to have those conversations with payers and Key Opinion Leaders, but we’re also objective. This can mean some uncomfortable conversations at times, but it’s hugely valuable.
Pressure testing is about looking at the TPP from the outside in and questioning each assumption it contains. It combines a critical review of the profile itself with structured input from external experts.
The aim is validation. Sometimes the process confirms that the strategy holds up. In other cases, it shows where expectations need to change, whether that means refining the target population, raising the clinical bar, or rethinking the commercial opportunity. We often define best and worst-case scenarios, and work out what that means for the utility of the product.
The whole process is highly collaborative. Most of our projects start with a review of an existing TPP. From there, we look at the current standard of care, patient pathways, and the competitive landscape, including assets that could reach the market around the same time. Remember that in many cases, we’re reviewing the TPP of a product that’s 10 years away from launch so we have to consider what the standard of care will look like then – not now.
Primary research plays a big role. We design and conduct interviews with relevant experts help build a picture of how the product would be viewed in real-world settings. The depth can vary, from a relatively quick sense check to more detailed assessments that form part of broader commercial or diligence work.
Because a TPP is essentially a blueprint, once you have that seal of approval from physicians, payers and others, it provides the confidence to make the next round of investment decisions. That might mean progressing to the next stage of development, refining trial design, or narrowing the focus to a specific patient group. For smaller companies, it can also strengthen the investment story by showing that the product has been assessed rigorously from both clinical and commercial angles.
Obviously it doesn’t entirely remove risk – that’s fundamental to the nature of drug development – but it does add rigor to the process.
One is leaning too heavily on informal feedback. A few encouraging conversations at a conference are useful, but they are not a substitute for structured assessment.
Another is underestimating how high the bar really is. Incremental improvements are often not enough to change behavior, especially when existing therapies have established safety and reimbursement profiles. A strong TPP process helps surface those realities early on.
A strong TPP is ambitious but credible. It reflects a clear understanding of unmet need, competitive context, and commercial constraints. Most importantly, it has been challenged by the people who will ultimately decide whether the product is used, reimbursed, and valued.
That is what turns a TPP from a theoretical exercise into a practical tool for guiding development and investment decisions.
Firstly, because we’ve been doing it for years which means we have access to great networks to conduct that primary research I talked about. And of course, we have a ton of data from across Norstella that will help establish things like patient population – what’s the real addressable market for your drug?
Our team is hugely experienced in commercial assessments and due diligence work which is all closely linked to a TPP so often we’ll work with companies at several stages of their journey to market. Our goal is to become an extension of their team so we can support their decision making and give them the best possible chance of taking a life-changing new therapy to patients.
Evaluate’s custom analytics team help you to address unique commercial challenges. We answer key asset, portfolio, and corporate strategy-related questions, powered by the combined resources of Norstella. With access to extensive data assets and experience across therapy areas and modalities, we partner with you to provide the answers you need to drive success.
Get in touch with our team to explore the right solutions for your business.
