Cargando…

Non-commercial pharmaceutical R&D: what do neglected diseases suggest about costs and efficiency?

Background: The past two decades have witnessed significant growth in non-commercial research and development (R&D) initiatives, particularly for neglected diseases, but there is limited understanding of the ways in which they compare with commercial R&D. This study analyses costs, timelines...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vieira, Marcela, Kimmitt, Ryan, Moon, Suerie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: F1000 Research Limited 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8063537/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33953909
http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.28281.2
_version_ 1783681967929163776
author Vieira, Marcela
Kimmitt, Ryan
Moon, Suerie
author_facet Vieira, Marcela
Kimmitt, Ryan
Moon, Suerie
author_sort Vieira, Marcela
collection PubMed
description Background: The past two decades have witnessed significant growth in non-commercial research and development (R&D) initiatives, particularly for neglected diseases, but there is limited understanding of the ways in which they compare with commercial R&D. This study analyses costs, timelines, and attrition rates of non-commercial R&D across multiple initiatives and how they compare to commercial R&D. Methods: This is a mixed-method, observational, descriptive, and analytic study. We contacted 48 non-commercial R&D initiatives and received either quantitative and/or qualitative data from 13 organizations. We used the Portfolio to Impact (P2I) model’s estimates of average costs, timelines, and attrition rates for commercial R&D, while noting that P2I cost estimates are far lower than some previous findings in the literature. Results: The quantitative data suggested that the costs and timelines per candidate per phase (from preclinical through Phase 3) of non-commercial R&D for new chemical entities are largely in line with commercial averages. The quantitative data was insufficient to compare attrition rates. The qualitative data identified more reasons why non-commercial R&D costs would be lower than commercial R&D, timelines would be longer, and attrition rates would be equivalent or higher, though the data does not allow for estimating the magnitude of these effects. Conclusions: The quantitative data suggest that costs and timelines per candidate per phase were largely in line with (lower-end estimates of) commercial averages. We were unable to draw conclusions on overall efficiency, however, due to insufficient data on attrition rates. Given that non-commercial R&D is a nascent area of research with limited data available, this study contributes to the literature by generating hypotheses for further testing against a larger sample of quantitative data. It also offers a range of explanatory factors for further exploration regarding how non-commercial and commercial R&D may differ in costs and efficiency.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8063537
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher F1000 Research Limited
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80635372021-05-04 Non-commercial pharmaceutical R&D: what do neglected diseases suggest about costs and efficiency? Vieira, Marcela Kimmitt, Ryan Moon, Suerie F1000Res Research Article Background: The past two decades have witnessed significant growth in non-commercial research and development (R&D) initiatives, particularly for neglected diseases, but there is limited understanding of the ways in which they compare with commercial R&D. This study analyses costs, timelines, and attrition rates of non-commercial R&D across multiple initiatives and how they compare to commercial R&D. Methods: This is a mixed-method, observational, descriptive, and analytic study. We contacted 48 non-commercial R&D initiatives and received either quantitative and/or qualitative data from 13 organizations. We used the Portfolio to Impact (P2I) model’s estimates of average costs, timelines, and attrition rates for commercial R&D, while noting that P2I cost estimates are far lower than some previous findings in the literature. Results: The quantitative data suggested that the costs and timelines per candidate per phase (from preclinical through Phase 3) of non-commercial R&D for new chemical entities are largely in line with commercial averages. The quantitative data was insufficient to compare attrition rates. The qualitative data identified more reasons why non-commercial R&D costs would be lower than commercial R&D, timelines would be longer, and attrition rates would be equivalent or higher, though the data does not allow for estimating the magnitude of these effects. Conclusions: The quantitative data suggest that costs and timelines per candidate per phase were largely in line with (lower-end estimates of) commercial averages. We were unable to draw conclusions on overall efficiency, however, due to insufficient data on attrition rates. Given that non-commercial R&D is a nascent area of research with limited data available, this study contributes to the literature by generating hypotheses for further testing against a larger sample of quantitative data. It also offers a range of explanatory factors for further exploration regarding how non-commercial and commercial R&D may differ in costs and efficiency. F1000 Research Limited 2021-08-16 /pmc/articles/PMC8063537/ /pubmed/33953909 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.28281.2 Text en Copyright: © 2021 Vieira M et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Vieira, Marcela
Kimmitt, Ryan
Moon, Suerie
Non-commercial pharmaceutical R&D: what do neglected diseases suggest about costs and efficiency?
title Non-commercial pharmaceutical R&D: what do neglected diseases suggest about costs and efficiency?
title_full Non-commercial pharmaceutical R&D: what do neglected diseases suggest about costs and efficiency?
title_fullStr Non-commercial pharmaceutical R&D: what do neglected diseases suggest about costs and efficiency?
title_full_unstemmed Non-commercial pharmaceutical R&D: what do neglected diseases suggest about costs and efficiency?
title_short Non-commercial pharmaceutical R&D: what do neglected diseases suggest about costs and efficiency?
title_sort non-commercial pharmaceutical r&d: what do neglected diseases suggest about costs and efficiency?
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8063537/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33953909
http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.28281.2
work_keys_str_mv AT vieiramarcela noncommercialpharmaceuticalrdwhatdoneglecteddiseasessuggestaboutcostsandefficiency
AT kimmittryan noncommercialpharmaceuticalrdwhatdoneglecteddiseasessuggestaboutcostsandefficiency
AT moonsuerie noncommercialpharmaceuticalrdwhatdoneglecteddiseasessuggestaboutcostsandefficiency