Cargando…
Pipeline progress and portfolio management of the top 30 pharma companies over the past two decades
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 p...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10540351/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37770995 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40545-023-00612-6 |
_version_ | 1785113696908869632 |
---|---|
author | Büssgen, Melanie Büssgen, Marcel A. |
author_facet | Büssgen, Melanie Büssgen, Marcel A. |
author_sort | Büssgen, Melanie |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40545-023-00612-6. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10540351 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-105403512023-09-30 Pipeline progress and portfolio management of the top 30 pharma companies over the past two decades Büssgen, Melanie Büssgen, Marcel A. J Pharm Policy Pract Research 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. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40545-023-00612-6. BioMed Central 2023-09-28 /pmc/articles/PMC10540351/ /pubmed/37770995 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40545-023-00612-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Büssgen, Melanie Büssgen, Marcel A. Pipeline progress and portfolio management of the top 30 pharma companies over the past two decades |
title | Pipeline progress and portfolio management of the top 30 pharma companies over the past two decades |
title_full | Pipeline progress and portfolio management of the top 30 pharma companies over the past two decades |
title_fullStr | Pipeline progress and portfolio management of the top 30 pharma companies over the past two decades |
title_full_unstemmed | Pipeline progress and portfolio management of the top 30 pharma companies over the past two decades |
title_short | Pipeline progress and portfolio management of the top 30 pharma companies over the past two decades |
title_sort | pipeline progress and portfolio management of the top 30 pharma companies over the past two decades |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10540351/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37770995 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40545-023-00612-6 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bussgenmelanie pipelineprogressandportfoliomanagementofthetop30pharmacompaniesoverthepasttwodecades AT bussgenmarcela pipelineprogressandportfoliomanagementofthetop30pharmacompaniesoverthepasttwodecades |