ABSTRACT
The role of a Medical Science Liaison (MSL) is of growing importance to pharmaceutical, biotechnology, diagnostic and medical device companies. Through scientific engagement MSLs add value to clinical practice, ultimately benefiting patients. The MSL role is dynamic and encompasses in-depth product and disease knowledge together with the ability to communicate relevant, unbiased scientific information concisely and timely. Tasks are focussed on contributing towards the advancement of medical knowledge, scientific data generation and dissemination. Professional relationships are developed, fostering collaboration between external experts and typically the medical affairs departments of pharmaceutical companies through a credible liaison. Through such relationships, critical insights are shared that shape the development pipeline, promote successful clinical translation and guide the market deployment strategy of therapeutic interventions through-out their life cycle. Despite the rising number of MSLs in the field and the implicit medical value of the role, there remains a lack of understanding for what the roles of an MSL entails. In Africa, where exponential growth of the pharmaceutical industry is expected, the number of MSLs will increase rapidly. Given the complexities of the African continent, the MSLs in this burgeoning environment will face various challenges including remote locations, time-constraints, regulatory and bureaucratic hurdles and importantly physician misperception of the MSL role that collectively may thwart the goal of meaningful scientific engagement; but these challenges can be surmounted through astute proactive planning and utilization of opportunities including digital communication strategies
Subject(s)
Africa , Communication , Disease , Professional PracticeABSTRACT
Sulphonylureas (SUs) are oral anti-diabetic drugs (OADs) that were introduced more than 60 years ago. Clinicians are familiar with their use and they remain extensively used. However; the SU class is associated with adverse effects of weight gain and hypoglycaemia. In addition; their effects on cardiovascular events remain contentious. Newer classes of anti-diabetic agents have been developed and these agents are weight neutral (di-peptidyl peptidase IV inhibitors); while others reduce weight (glucagon-like peptide analogues and sodium glucose co-transporter inhibitors). Furthermore; the newer agents are less likely to cause hypoglycaemia and have a potentially better cardiovascular safety profile. However; the newer agents are more costly than SUs and their long-term safety is unknown. It is therefore likely that SUs will continue to be used; and more so in resource-limited settings. One may mitigate the adverse effects of weight gain and hypoglycaemia associated with the SU class by using members within this class that are less probable to cause these adverse effects. Furthermore; the specific SU must be used at the lowest effective therapeutic dose. In patients at high risk of SU-induced hypoglycaemic episodes (frail; clinically significant renal impairment); or patients in whom hypoglycaemic episodes may have devastating effects (bus drivers); newer anti-diabetic agents may be a justifiable alternative option