When multiple respiratory biologics show comparable FEV1 and exacerbation data, the differentiation challenge shifts to the evidence strategy: which outcomes, in which populations, generated on what timeline — and whether you get there before a competitor does.

For medical leads, that increasingly means evidence from the patients current pivotal data misses: older, comorbid, polypharmacy, and mobility-limited populations in community settings. Outcomes that reflect how these diverse, real-world patients respond to treatment. And an operational approach that can deliver it at the speed the competitive window demands — where site-only models are reaching their limits on both recruitment pace and population breadth.

In this webinar, panelists from across pharma, managed care, academic medicine, and clinical operations discuss how respiratory programmes are closing these evidence gaps in practice.

Why This Matters Now

• Multiple biologics with similar efficacy — the differentiation window is narrowing
• Guideline bodies and prescribers need real-world evidence from representative populations to differentiate therapies in practice
• Evidence gaps identified today may be closed by a competitor tomorrow
• Site-only models are reaching their limits on both speed and the population breadth physicians need to see

What You’ll Hear

How respiratory programmes are:

• Identifying the evidence gaps that matter most to prescribers and guideline bodies — beyond FEV1 and exacerbation rates
• Reaching broader, more representative populations — including older, comorbid, and mobility-limited patients rarely captured in pivotal data
• Capturing consistent, diagnostic-grade respiratory data remotely using validated tools such as home spirometry (e.g. GoSpiro) — across patients of all age groups and mobility levels, at home and in community settings
• Translating evidence gaps into actionable Phase 3b/4 and prospective RWE study designs that deliver evidence faster
• Generating clinically meaningful longitudinal data that supports differentiation with both physicians and payors

What You’ll Leave With

• A clear view of which patient-centred outcomes matter most to prescribers and guideline bodies when differentiating respiratory biologics
• How remote diagnostics generate clinically meaningful data from diverse populations that conventional approaches miss
• Practical approaches to translating evidence gaps into study designs that reach representative populations faster
• How to structure Phase 3b/4 and RWE studies that balance clinical relevance, speed, and submission credibility

‍