Details
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 109 |
| Journal | Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice |
| Volume | 16 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| Early online date | 28 Sept 2023 |
| Publication status | Published - 2023 |
Abstract
For pharmaceutical companies, it is essential to define their long-term corporate strategy. This especially involves the pipeline progress of pharmaceuticals and portfolio management. The objective of this study was to give a broad overview of study durations of the clinical trials from the top 30 pharmaceutical companies worldwide and to investigate what could possibly impact these study durations (e.g., indication areas, companies themselves, etc.) We worked with the clinicaltrials.gov database to examine the pipeline (phase 1–3) and portfolio (after regulatory approval) of the top 30 pharma companies worldwide over 20 years (from 2000–2020). We further calculated the study duration of each clinical study as the difference between the start date and end date. To analyze changes in our measure we estimated multiple linear regression to evaluate the impact of indication areas and companies on the study duration. Most of the clinical studies were conducted in the areas of ONCIM (N = 2720), and META (N = 1993). The indication with the highest study duration was ONCIM (on average 3.9 years per clinical study, SD: 0.8). Values for the study duration vary widely across companies. Mostly they range between 1 and 4 years (e.g., Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD) on average 2.2 years per clinical study, SD: 1.0). Correlation analysis showed that study phases were positively correlated with the study duration (+ 0.36, p < 0.000), i.e., the higher the study phase, the higher the study duration. Furthermore, we found that indication areas influenced the study duration significantly (+ 0.17, p < 0.000). However, there were wide variations in effect sizes across indications. The results suggest that different indication areas influence the study duration to different extents. Pipeline progress and portfolio management differ widely between indications, companies and over the years. Research findings could help corporate strategy managers to make more informed decisions regarding their business development strategy.
Keywords
- Clinical studies, Clinical trials, Pharma market, Pharmaceutical industry, Pipeline, Portfolio management, Strategy
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Health Professions(all)
- Pharmacy
- Medicine(all)
- Health Policy
Sustainable Development Goals
Cite this
- Standard
- Harvard
- Apa
- Vancouver
- BibTeX
- RIS
In: Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice, Vol. 16, No. 1, 109, 2023.
Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Research › peer review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Pipeline progress and portfolio management of the top 30 pharma companies over the past two decades
AU - Büssgen, Melanie
AU - Büssgen, Marcel A.
N1 - Funding information: None.
PY - 2023
Y1 - 2023
N2 - For pharmaceutical companies, it is essential to define their long-term corporate strategy. This especially involves the pipeline progress of pharmaceuticals and portfolio management. The objective of this study was to give a broad overview of study durations of the clinical trials from the top 30 pharmaceutical companies worldwide and to investigate what could possibly impact these study durations (e.g., indication areas, companies themselves, etc.) We worked with the clinicaltrials.gov database to examine the pipeline (phase 1–3) and portfolio (after regulatory approval) of the top 30 pharma companies worldwide over 20 years (from 2000–2020). We further calculated the study duration of each clinical study as the difference between the start date and end date. To analyze changes in our measure we estimated multiple linear regression to evaluate the impact of indication areas and companies on the study duration. Most of the clinical studies were conducted in the areas of ONCIM (N = 2720), and META (N = 1993). The indication with the highest study duration was ONCIM (on average 3.9 years per clinical study, SD: 0.8). Values for the study duration vary widely across companies. Mostly they range between 1 and 4 years (e.g., Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD) on average 2.2 years per clinical study, SD: 1.0). Correlation analysis showed that study phases were positively correlated with the study duration (+ 0.36, p < 0.000), i.e., the higher the study phase, the higher the study duration. Furthermore, we found that indication areas influenced the study duration significantly (+ 0.17, p < 0.000). However, there were wide variations in effect sizes across indications. The results suggest that different indication areas influence the study duration to different extents. Pipeline progress and portfolio management differ widely between indications, companies and over the years. Research findings could help corporate strategy managers to make more informed decisions regarding their business development strategy.
AB - For pharmaceutical companies, it is essential to define their long-term corporate strategy. This especially involves the pipeline progress of pharmaceuticals and portfolio management. The objective of this study was to give a broad overview of study durations of the clinical trials from the top 30 pharmaceutical companies worldwide and to investigate what could possibly impact these study durations (e.g., indication areas, companies themselves, etc.) We worked with the clinicaltrials.gov database to examine the pipeline (phase 1–3) and portfolio (after regulatory approval) of the top 30 pharma companies worldwide over 20 years (from 2000–2020). We further calculated the study duration of each clinical study as the difference between the start date and end date. To analyze changes in our measure we estimated multiple linear regression to evaluate the impact of indication areas and companies on the study duration. Most of the clinical studies were conducted in the areas of ONCIM (N = 2720), and META (N = 1993). The indication with the highest study duration was ONCIM (on average 3.9 years per clinical study, SD: 0.8). Values for the study duration vary widely across companies. Mostly they range between 1 and 4 years (e.g., Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD) on average 2.2 years per clinical study, SD: 1.0). Correlation analysis showed that study phases were positively correlated with the study duration (+ 0.36, p < 0.000), i.e., the higher the study phase, the higher the study duration. Furthermore, we found that indication areas influenced the study duration significantly (+ 0.17, p < 0.000). However, there were wide variations in effect sizes across indications. The results suggest that different indication areas influence the study duration to different extents. Pipeline progress and portfolio management differ widely between indications, companies and over the years. Research findings could help corporate strategy managers to make more informed decisions regarding their business development strategy.
KW - Clinical studies
KW - Clinical trials
KW - Pharma market
KW - Pharmaceutical industry
KW - Pipeline
KW - Portfolio management
KW - Strategy
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85173587171&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1186/s40545-023-00612-6
DO - 10.1186/s40545-023-00612-6
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85173587171
VL - 16
JO - Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice
JF - Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice
IS - 1
M1 - 109
ER -