Medaffcon Contributes to the Public Good through Academic Collaboration

Medaffcon’s experts actively collaborate with academic institutions and contribute to ongoing research initiatives. These collaborations enhance the expertise of both researchers and Medaffcon.

While the majority of Medaffcon’s revenue comes from the pharmaceutical industry, the company’s activities are not limited only to commercial projects. At any given time, several academic projects may be ongoing on either commercial terms, or on a pro bono basis — meaning they are carried out without compensation, and for the benefit of society.

A recent example is the article by oncologist Joel Kontiainen, Cost-effectiveness analysis of operative versus non-operative management of colorectal cancer metastases in the Finnish RAXO Study, published in early February in Acta Oncologica. Medaffcon’s Principal Consultant Jarmo Hahl and Data Analysis Lead Iiro Toppila contributed health economic analysis to the study.

“We want to contribute to the development of healthcare through our expertise. At the same time, we gain a broader understanding of the system and its challenges, which strengthens our overall competence as a company. Our motivation also stems from a desire to give back to the society from which we have received so much,” says Hahl.

Collaboration with academia improves understanding of real-world research in Finland

According to Toppila, collaboration with academia provides valuable insight into the current state of real-world research in Finland.

“We have acted as expert advisors, delivered turnkey research frameworks to academic groups, assisted in data retrieval and processing, and supported projects up to the stage where everything is ready for writing,” Toppila explains.

The collaboration has included study protocol development, data processing and analytics, and support in scientific writing. Trained data scientists from Medaffcon always help on the interpretation of results and are happy to discuss the conclusions that can be drawn from the data. Partnerships have included for example Helsinki University Hospital (HUS), the University Hospitals of Kuopio, Oulu and Tampere. Data sources were selected according to the specific research questions and have included national registries, hospital records, OMOP databases, and broader European registry datasets.

“Scientific research questions arise from the academia. We have the expertise on the permission processes and optimized workflows to conduct the studies, and especially the people resources to make it happen. We are prepared to handle the bureaucracy, statistics and data processing, whenever academic researchers lack the know-how or time,” continues Toppila.

Latest Example: Foundational Health Economic Research on Colorectal Cancer

The most recent example is Joel Kontiainen’s article, part of his doctoral dissertation. The study can be described as foundational health economic research on colorectal cancer.

The collaboration between Kontiainen and Medaffcon began several years ago when he started his doctoral research.

“The study included data from one thousand patients, and we began exploring whether a cost-effectiveness analysis could be conducted. Since we did not have in-house health economic expertise, we contacted Medaffcon at an early stage and requested support for the analysis,” Kontiainen explains.

The research question examined how the survival benefit achieved through surgical treatment of colorectal cancer metastases compares to the resources invested. According to Kontiainen, colorectal cancer treatment practices differ from many other cancers, as metastases in the liver and lungs may be surgically removed — an approach not typically used in most other cancers.

Limited Healthcare Resources Require Prioritisation

Many colorectal cancer patients undergo intensive and costly treatments over extended periods. Approximately two-thirds experience at least one recurrence. The analyses conducted do not determine at the individual level who should or should not receive treatment. It is also important to remember that the study examined metastatic colorectal cancer.

Kontiainen notes that healthcare inevitably requires prioritisation: decisions must be made about who receives access to surgery — for example, whether it is a colorectal cancer patient or a patient in need of hip replacement surgery. Often, the constraint is not funding but limited facilities, such as insufficient personnel or operating room capacity. The allocation of scarce resources is a continuous challenge.

“We know surprisingly little about what current treatments truly cost and what they deliver, and we need more data. In oncology, we know there are substantial differences in care processes. Total costs are known at the level of cancer types, but treatment pathways may vary significantly. When we start examining processes more closely, we can also begin improving them,” Kontiainen says.

A Collaborative Mindset and Openness to Sharing Expertise

Kontiainen expresses strong appreciation for the collaboration with Medaffcon’s experts.

“Iiro and Jarmo truly know their field. They understood our needs and what we aimed to investigate. In health economics, it is easy to become overwhelmed by complexity, but they patiently answered our questions. From the outset, we agreed that the core research work would be conducted within the academic team, while Medaffcon would serve in an expert advisory role,” Kontiainen explains.

Medaffcon’s role was primarily educational. The company’s approach to academic collaboration is notably open.

“We wanted to learn and build internal competence so that we can conduct similar analyses independently in the future. Medaffcon is not protective of its expertise — they share it generously. That is truly commendable,” Kontiainen concludes.