Dahlin E, Nelson G M, Haynes M, Sargeant F
Department of Sociology, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA.
Harold B. Lee Library, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA.
J Clin Pharm Ther. 2016 Apr;41(2):198-202. doi: 10.1111/jcpt.12362. Epub 2016 Feb 15.
While research has examined the likelihood that drugs progress across phases of clinical trials, no research to date has examined the types of product development strategies that are the most likely to be successful in clinical trials. This research seeks to identify the strategies that are most likely to reach the market-those generated using a novel product development strategy or strategies that combine a company's expertise with both drugs and indications, which we call combined experience strategies.
We evaluate the success of product development strategies in the drug development process for a sample of 2562 clinical trials completed by 406 US pharmaceutical companies. To identify product development strategies, we coded each clinical trial according to whether it consisted of an indication or a drug that was new to the firm. Accordingly, a clinical trial that consists of both an indication and a drug that were both new to the firm represents a novel product development strategy; indication experience is a product development strategy that consists of an indication that a firm had tested previously in a clinical trial, but with a drug that was new to the firm; drug experience is a product development strategy that consists of a drug that the firm had prior experience testing in clinical trials, but with an indication that was new to the firm; combined experience consists of both a drug and an indication that the firm had experience testing in clinical trials. Success rates for product development strategies across clinical phases were calculated for the clinical trials in our sample.
Combined experience strategies had the highest success rate. More than three and a half percent (0·036) of the trials that combined experience with drugs and indications eventually reached the market. The next most successful strategy is drug experience (0·025) with novel strategies trailing closely (0·024). Indication experience strategies are the least successful (0·008). These differences are statistically significant.
The primary contribution of this study is that product development strategies combining experience with drugs and indications strategies are the most likely to reach the market, even though they are least common strategy. Therefore, combined experience strategies remain underutilized. The findings also suggest a promising path for pursuing combined experience strategies: gaining expertise with drugs is likely to be a more effective path to gaining the expertise necessary for developing subsequent recombination strategies.
尽管已有研究探讨了药物在临床试验各阶段取得进展的可能性,但迄今为止,尚无研究考察在临床试验中最有可能成功的产品开发策略类型。本研究旨在确定最有可能推向市场的策略——即那些采用新颖产品开发策略或结合公司在药物和适应症方面专业知识的策略,我们将其称为综合经验策略。
我们评估了美国406家制药公司完成的2562项临床试验样本在药物开发过程中产品开发策略的成功率。为确定产品开发策略,我们根据每项临床试验所涉及的适应症或药物对公司而言是否为新的,对其进行编码。因此,一项临床试验若涉及的适应症和药物对公司而言均为新的,则代表一种新颖的产品开发策略;适应症经验是一种产品开发策略,即公司曾在临床试验中测试过的适应症,但所使用的药物对公司而言是新的;药物经验是一种产品开发策略,即公司曾在临床试验中测试过的药物,但所涉及的适应症对公司而言是新的;综合经验包括公司曾在临床试验中测试过的药物和适应症。我们计算了样本中各临床试验不同产品开发策略在各临床阶段的成功率。
综合经验策略的成功率最高。超过3.5%(0.036)的将药物和适应症经验相结合的试验最终推向了市场。其次最成功的策略是药物经验(0.025),新颖策略紧随其后(0.024)。适应症经验策略最不成功(0.008)。这些差异具有统计学意义。
本研究的主要贡献在于,将经验与药物和适应症策略相结合的产品开发策略最有可能推向市场,尽管它们是最不常见的策略。因此,综合经验策略仍未得到充分利用。研究结果还为推行综合经验策略指明了一条有前景的道路:积累药物方面的专业知识可能是获取开发后续重组策略所需专业知识的更有效途径。