Case Studies / Rare disease patient pathway mapping: country-specific …
Medical Affairs Evidence Generation Rare Disease

Rare disease patient pathway mapping: country-specific diagnostic journey analysis to reduce time to diagnosis

Challenge
Patients were waiting an average of 5+ years for a rare disease diagnosis — but the specific points at which the diagnostic system was failing differed by country, making a generic intervention ineffective.
Approach
Conducted country-specific patient pathway research using qualitative physician interviews, patient registry data, and claims database analysis — producing quantified bottleneck profiles for each market.
Result
Country-specific bottleneck profiles delivered; targeted intervention recommendations integrated into the Medical Affairs engagement strategy.
The challenge

Average diagnostic delay means different things in different countries

For a rare condition with an average reported diagnostic delay of 5.4 years, the published statistic was clear — but it concealed significant variation. In some markets, the delay happened primarily at the GP level: patients were presenting to primary care physicians multiple times over years without being referred to a specialist. In other markets, specialist referral happened relatively quickly but confirmatory testing was delayed by laboratory capacity constraints or lack of access to specialist diagnostic centres.

A brand entering a priority market for an orphan treatment needed to address diagnostic delay — both as a genuine medical objective and as part of the unmet need argument for HTA submissions. A one-size-fits-all intervention could not work without first understanding precisely where the diagnostic system was failing.

Country-specific patient pathway mapping was the necessary foundation — not just to understand the problem, but to design targeted interventions that could actually move the needle on time to diagnosis in each individual market.

Diagnostic delay in rare disease is a systemic failure — but the system fails at different points in different countries. You cannot fix a problem you have not precisely located.

Our approach

What we did

1
Country-specific pathway research design
Designed a mixed-methods research protocol: semi-structured physician interviews, patient registry data extraction where available, and claims database analysis to quantify patient transition rates between pathway stages.
2
Physician interview programme
Conducted qualitative interviews with GPs, referring specialists, and diagnostic centre physicians. Interviews structured around specific pathway stages: first presentation, referral decision, diagnostic workup, and confirmatory testing.
3
Quantitative pathway analysis
Applied claims data and registry data to quantify patient flow through each pathway stage. Calculated estimated patient loss at each transition point and constructed probability-weighted pathway models for each market.
4
Bottleneck identification and profiling
Identified the 2–3 primary bottlenecks in each country's diagnostic pathway. Produced country-specific bottleneck profiles with estimated patient numbers affected at each point and root cause analysis.
5
Intervention recommendations
For each market, developed specific, actionable recommendations for reducing diagnostic delay at the identified bottlenecks. Recommendations ranged from GP education tools to specialist capacity building to diagnostic laboratory pathway enhancements.
Result

Measurable impact

Country-specific bottleneck profiles were delivered, documenting distinct patterns of diagnostic delay. Primary bottlenecks identified included GP recognition failure, specialist-to-diagnostic-centre access, and laboratory testing capacity. The Medical Affairs team integrated the recommendations into their annual engagement strategy. The pathway analysis was incorporated as supporting evidence in HTA submissions and cited by a national guideline committee as informing a recommendation on specialist referral pathways.

Multi-stakeholder
qualitative research
Interviews with GPs, specialists, and diagnostic centre physicians
Bottleneck profiles
delivered
With targeted intervention recommendations per pathway stage
HTA submissions
supported
Pathway analysis incorporated as unmet need evidence
Facing a similar challenge?

Tell us what you’re working on — we’ll show you relevant cases and suggest the fastest path forward.

Evidence Scanner
Evidence ScannerTM
AI infrastructure

AI-powered.
Expert-validated.

We built AI workflows into our daily practice — not as a marketing claim, but as the infrastructure that lets our medical experts deliver faster without cutting corners.

Research
Structured PubMed queries with narrative or table outputs
Monitoring
Weekly literature digests by drug, target, or topic
AI-Enhanced EDC
Electronic data capture with AI-assisted structuring of unstructured records
Fact-Checker
Claim verification against your source documents
AI accelerates. Our experts validate.
Every output goes through expert medical review before it reaches your team. AI handles structure and speed — we handle scientific judgement and MLR readiness.
Evidence Scanner · Research module
// Query: ribociclib OS data MONALEESA 2023–24
search("ribociclib overall survival", {
  years: [2023, 2024],
  output: "structured_table"
})
// 847 records → 23 relevant
Processing 847 records...
Evidence Summary
MONALEESA-2 updated OS (NEJM 2023): median OS 63.9 mo vs 51.4 mo (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.63–0.93). Benefit maintained across all pre-specified subgroups...