Upload
others
View
46
Download
4
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
MARCH, 2020
CRO QUALITY BENCHMARKING – PHASE II/III SERVICE PROVIDERS (12TH EDITION)
WORLDWIDE CLINICAL TRIALS COMPANY PERFORMANCE PROFILE, EXCERPT FROM CRO QUALITY BENCHMARKING - PHASE II/III SERVICE PROVIDERS, 12TH EDITION
2ISRreports.com ©2020 CRO Quality Benchmarking – Phase II/III Service Providers (12th edition)
Outsourcing. Such a small word to depict sizeable decision-making. When it comes to the complex world of clinical trials, it takes a village. And a lot of that village is outsourced. Whether you’re a veteran or new to the business of clinical trials, we at ISR aim to take two of the most challenging and time-consuming processes out of the abstract: CRO selection and CRO performance evaluation. Which provider is best to conduct a given trial? Who will perform the best? With more than a decade of this type of research under our belts, we provide a wealth of information in the form of this quality benchmarking report to address these questions. The goal? To take the mystery and stress out of your service provider selection process. Informed decisions are the best decisions.
This year’s report includes insights from 233 experienced Phase II/III outsourcers and nearly 700 service provider encounters – all helping to frame what you need to be in the driver’s seat. First obstacle: CRO selection. This report puts a variety of factors under a microscope so you can focus on the things that matter most. The prevalence of preferred provider agreements, for example, is increasing (up 11 percentage points since last year). PPAs or the lack thereof can influence the importance of certain needs – or provider attributes – over others. We analyzed three decision-making scenarios, uncovering their similarities and differences. While some attributes such as Operational excellence and Therapeutic expertise continue to be shared by all scenarios, other attributes are a higher priority when looking at each scenario individually. New this year we inquired about the use of outside consultants to help with outsourcing decisions. One-third of respondents said they seek third-party guidance and were candid about their needs. Herein lies the point that sponsors can directly apply this information to their own selection environment while CROs can arm themselves accordingly in a bid defense.
The bulk of this report addresses the second obstacle: CRO performance evaluation. If you’re a pharma project manager on the hunt for a provider meeting a myriad of criteria, and your short list isn’t already giving you the answer, this report will help alleviate some of that initial guesswork. How? Forty provider drilldowns are provided in this report – our respondents rated 40 Phase II/III providers on 21 attributes across four categories (Budget Factors, Delivery Factors, Staff Characteristics, and Services). In addition, providers with at least 10 respondent evaluations are showcased in what we call profile pages. These pages are market research gold – they give a sense of a provider’s brand positioning, customer loyalty, and attribute-specific strengths and weaknesses. All drilldowns also include loyalty scores and respondent comments that further shed light on users’ experiences. For example, user comments such as “Their therapeutic expertise was excellent, and they helped develop a scientifically and regulatory appropriate protocol” can be immensely helpful with a ‘desired provider’ checklist. For the CRO, these recent customer accolades can tailor strategic marketing efforts.
IN THIS EXCERPT: The content for this excerpt was taken directly from CRO Quality Benchmarking - Phase I Service Providers report, June 2018. All or parts of the following sections are included in this excerpt: ISR Introduction, Methodology, Participant Criteria, Service Provider Performance and Loyalty Primary Section Takeaways, Company Service Quality Profiles, Worldwide Clinical Trials Performance Summary, Performance Across Service Providers, and About ISR.
INTRODUCTION
3ISRreports.com ©2020 CRO Quality Benchmarking – Phase II/III Service Providers (12th edition)
If this report doesn’t take at least some of the mystery and stress out of your provider selection and performance evaluation processes, let us know. We’re in the business of providing quality market research to ensure both sponsors and providers can glean what they need to make the best decisions possible for their clinical development programs and service offerings. Let’s get started – welcome to the 12th edition of ISR’s CRO Quality Benchmarking - Phase II/III Service Providers report.
INTRODUCTION
4ISRreports.com ©2020 CRO Quality Benchmarking – Phase II/III Service Providers (12th edition)
METHODOLOGY
D A T A C O L L E C T I O N I N Q 4 , 2 0 1 9
3 0 - M I N U T E W E B - B A S E D Q U A N T I T A T I V E S U R V E Y
2 3 3 R E S P O N D E N T S F R O M N O R T H A M E R I C A , E U R O P E , A N D A S I A233
6 9 7 S E R V I C E E N C O U T E R S C A P T U R E D
5ISRreports.com ©2020 CRO Quality Benchmarking – Phase II/III Service Providers (12th edition)
Respondents were required to pass several screening criteria to qualify and participate in this survey:
• Must work at a pharmaceutical company, biotech company, or medical device company
• Must have responsibility in at least one of several relevant areas such as Clinical Operations, Project Management, Executive Management, or Research and Development Management
• Must have involvement with outsourced Phase II/III trials within past 12 months
Consolidation is nothing new to the contract services industry, and a number of companies featured in this report have been part of recent M&A activity. At ISR we know that integration of a new acquisition can take a significant amount of time; as such, companies acquired within the past 18-24 months are still represented by the prior brand along with the new name in the survey.
Participant Criteria
6ISRreports.com ©2020 CRO Quality Benchmarking – Phase II/III Service Providers (12th edition)
Number of Ratings Per CompanyService Provider
Respondent Ratings
Advanced Clinical 4
Bioclinica 15
Biorasi 2
Bioskin 2
Catalyst Clinical Research 3
Clinical Research Services (CRS) 4
Clinipace 9
Clintec 2
Covance 81
CTI Clinical Trial & Consulting 3
DaVita Clinical Research 2
DCRI-DUKE 6
Eurofins 15
Frontage 3
ICON 70
Innovaderm 2
IQVIA 107
Lambda 3
Linical Accelovance 6
Medpace 19
Medsource 4
Service ProviderRespondent
Ratings
NAMSA 3
Navitas Life Sciences 2
Novotech 9
Ora 7
PAREXEL 95
Pharm-Olam International 4
PharPoint 3
PPD 67
PRA 41
PRC Clinical 2
Premier Research 11
PSI 6
QPS 3
Quanticate 3
Rho 8
SGS Life Sciences 7
Syneos Health 44
Synteract 9
Worldwide Clinical Trials 11
Total Ratings 697
Companies listed in bold print have been reviewed by 10 or more respondents. These providers have detailed company service quality profiles and are included in an in-depth performance analysis.
SERVICE PROVIDER PERFORMANCE AND LOYALTY
CRO QUALITY BENCHMARKING – PHASE II/III SERVICE PROVIDERS (12TH EDITION)
8ISRreports.com ©2020 CRO Quality Benchmarking – Phase II/III Service Providers (12th edition)
Primary Section Takeaways1. Top Performers:
• Overall: Worldwide Clinical Trials, PAREXEL, Medpace
• Budget Factors: Worldwide Clinical Trials, Premier Research, Medpace
• Delivery Factors: Worldwide Clinical Trials, PAREXEL, Medpace
• Staff Characteristics: Worldwide Clinical Trials, PAREXEL, ICON
• Services: PAREXEL, PRA, Medpace
2. Customer Loyalty:
• 2020 Top Performers: Worldwide Clinical Trials, PAREXEL, ICON, Covance
• 3-Year Rolling Average Top Performers: Novotech, PSI, PAREXEL, Bioclinica
COMPANY SERVICE QUALITY PROFILES
CRO QUALITY BENCHMARKING – PHASE II/III SERVICE PROVIDERS (12TH EDITION)
10ISRreports.com ©2020 CRO Quality Benchmarking – Phase II/III Service Providers (12th edition)
CRO QUALITY BENCHMARKING – PHASE II/III SERVICE PROVIDERS (12TH EDITION)
114466
Worldwide Clinical Trials (Base=11)
Loyalty Component Scores
Performance Relative to Expectations
7.1
7.1
7.1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Overall satisfaction
Likelihood to use again
Likelihood to recommend
25%
9%
9%
9%
9%
9%
18%
18%
9%
18%
18%
18%
33%
60%
13%
25%
50%
9%
9%
9%
27%
27%
27%
27%
18%
18%
18%
9%
9%
27%
18%
18%
18%
67%
40%
50%
50%
33%
64%
64%
73%
64%
64%
64%
64%
64%
64%
73%
55%
73%
55%
55%
55%
64%
13%
25%
17%
9%
18%
9%
9%
9%
9%
9%
18%
9%
9%
9%
18%
9%
9%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Central lab (n=3)
Biostatistics (n=5)
Data management (n=8)
Monitoring (n=8)
Investigator recruitment (n=6)
Staff turnover
Speed of site start-up
Technology for real-time access to data
Patient recruitment
Data quality
Study design expertise
Meeting overall project timelines
Project manager quality
Appropriateness of change orders
Timely project communications
Operational excellence
Local market/Regulatory knowledge
Therapeutic expertise
Easy to work with
Responsiveness
Cost
% of Respondents
Greatly exceeded my expectationsSomewhat exceeded my expectationsMet my expectationsSomewhat fell short of my expectationsGreatly fell short of my expectations
Worldwide Clinical Trials(Base=11)
Loyalty Component Scores
Performance Relative to Expectations
CRO QUALITY BENCHMARKING – PHASE II/III SERVICE PROVIDERS (12TH EDITION)
114466
Worldwide Clinical Trials (Base=11)
Loyalty Component Scores
Performance Relative to Expectations
7.1
7.1
7.1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Overall satisfaction
Likelihood to use again
Likelihood to recommend
25%
9%
9%
9%
9%
9%
18%
18%
9%
18%
18%
18%
33%
60%
13%
25%
50%
9%
9%
9%
27%
27%
27%
27%
18%
18%
18%
9%
9%
27%
18%
18%
18%
67%
40%
50%
50%
33%
64%
64%
73%
64%
64%
64%
64%
64%
64%
73%
55%
73%
55%
55%
55%
64%
13%
25%
17%
9%
18%
9%
9%
9%
9%
9%
18%
9%
9%
9%
18%
9%
9%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Central lab (n=3)
Biostatistics (n=5)
Data management (n=8)
Monitoring (n=8)
Investigator recruitment (n=6)
Staff turnover
Speed of site start-up
Technology for real-time access to data
Patient recruitment
Data quality
Study design expertise
Meeting overall project timelines
Project manager quality
Appropriateness of change orders
Timely project communications
Operational excellence
Local market/Regulatory knowledge
Therapeutic expertise
Easy to work with
Responsiveness
Cost
% of Respondents
Greatly exceeded my expectationsSomewhat exceeded my expectationsMet my expectationsSomewhat fell short of my expectationsGreatly fell short of my expectations
© Industry Standard Research
© Industry Standard Research
11ISRreports.com ©2020 CRO Quality Benchmarking – Phase II/III Service Providers (12th edition)
Performance Across Service ProvidersThis “cross-CRO” chart has been developed as a way for pharma companies and CROs to quickly gauge how CROs perform against their peers on a specific performance attribute.
The metrics used in the following chart assign 3 points if respondents indicated the service pro-vider greatly exceeded expectations, 1 point if they somewhat exceeded expectations, 0 points if they met expectations, -1 point if they somewhat missed expectations and -3 points if they greatly missed expectations.
A service provider’s scores are included on this chart if 10 or more respondents evaluate its performance on that attribute. A note regarding the Services attributes: scores are only shown if at least 10 respon-dents have recent experience using the provider for a particular service. For example, Eurofins only has a score for one of the five services, Central lab. Though not every provider may offer each of these ser-vices, participants may rate the provider’s management (or perceived management) of these services.
12ISRreports.com ©2020 CRO Quality Benchmarking – Phase II/III Service Providers (12th edition)
World
wid
e Clin
ical T
rials
CRO E
CRO D
CRO C
CRO B
CRO A
Appropriateness of change orders 0.36 0.04 -0.73 -0.11 -0.20 -0.10 0.01 -0.31 -0.33 0.11 -0.09 0.55
Cost 0.73 0.13 -0.13 -0.20 -0.40 -0.15 0.02 -0.34 -0.28 0.11 -0.15 0.27
Data quality 0.18 0.13 0.40 0.20 0.00 0.12 0.20 0.06 -0.19 0.11 0.21 0.18
Easy to work with 0.64 0.16 0.27 -0.05 -0.33 0.20 0.20 0.02 -0.19 0.63 0.09 -0.09
Local market/Regulatory knowledge 0.64 0.04 0.00 -0.02 -0.33 -0.10 0.28 0.18 -0.13 0.11 0.10 0.27
Meeting overall project timelines 0.18 0.10 -0.07 0.07 -0.33 0.10 0.12 -0.09 -0.21 0.21 0.04 -0.09
Operational excellence 0.45 0.20 0.13 -0.07 -0.47 0.02 0.16 0.00 -0.13 0.26 0.14 0.09
Patient recruitment 0.18 0.00 -0.20 -0.02 -0.40 -0.07 0.16 -0.05 -0.03 0.11 -0.05 -0.09
Speed of site start-up 0.18 -0.14 0.13 -0.20 -0.33 -0.15 0.09 -0.23 -0.24 -0.05 -0.14 0.00
Technology for real-time access to data 0.09 0.20 0.40 -0.09 -0.33 -0.02 0.22 0.02 -0.12 0.05 0.04 -0.09
Project manager quality 0.18 0.23 0.00 -0.11 -0.33 0.05 0.28 0.10 -0.04 0.00 0.15 0.36
Responsiveness 0.64 0.13 -0.20 0.11 -0.07 0.15 0.24 -0.07 -0.04 0.21 0.14 0.00
Staff turnover -0.55 -0.07 0.00 -0.48 -0.40 0.00 -0.04 -0.42 -0.27 -0.32 -0.30 -0.18
Study design expertise 0.18 0.16 -0.27 -0.11 -0.27 -0.12 0.12 0.03 -0.10 0.00 0.14 0.00
Therapeutic expertise 0.45 0.24 0.40 -0.07 -0.47 0.20 0.31 0.13 0.01 0.32 0.14 -0.09
Timely project communications 0.45 0.14 -0.20 0.05 -0.40 0.00 0.07 -0.03 -0.12 0.11 0.06 0.27
Central lab 0.16 0.00 -0.33 0.23 0.38 0.07 0.09 0.15 0.07
Biostatistics 0.18 -0.04 0.21 0.32 0.18 0.04 0.18 0.04
Data management 0.06 -0.13 0.21 0.22 -0.01 -0.14 0.14 0.06
Monitoring -0.08 -0.06 0.07 0.30 -0.10 -0.16 0.17 0.08
Investigator recruitment 0.16 0.00 0.09 0.29 -0.05 -0.02 -0.07 0.06
NOTENOUGH
DATA
NOTENOUGH
DATA
NOTENOUGH
DATA
NOTENOUGH
DATA
NOTENOUGH
DATA
NOTENOUGH
DATA
NOTENOUGH
DATA
NOTENOUGH
DATA
NOTENOUGH
DATA
NOTENOUGH
DATA
NOTENOUGH
DATA
NOTENOUGH
DATA
NOTENOUGH
DATA
NOTENOUGH
DATA
NOTENOUGH
DATA
NOTENOUGH
DATA
NOTENOUGH
DATA
NOTENOUGH
DATA
NOTENOUGH
DATA
CRO F
CRO K
CRO J
CRO I
CRO H
CRO G
Industry Standard Research is the premier, full service market research provider to the pharma and pharma services industries. With over a decade of experience in the industry, ISR delivers an unmatched level of domain expertise.
For more information about our off-the-shelf intelligence and custom research offerings, please visit our website at ISRreports.com, email [email protected], or follow us on Twitter @ISRreports.
Send Us Your Feedback Because we are a service organization, we enjoy receiving feedback on our work. Please e-mail any comments, questions, or suggestions to [email protected].
Copyright 2020 Industry Standard Research. All rights reserved. “Act with confidence”, ISR Reports and Industry Standard Research are trademarks of Industry Standard Research. All other trademarks are property of their respective holders. Information is subject to change since Industry Standard Research reserves the right to make changes without notice. While the information contained herein has been prepared from sources deemed to be reliable, Industry Standard Research reserves the right to revise the information without notice but has no obligation to do so. Use of this information is at your sole discretion. For more information, contact Industry Standard Research at 1-919-301-0106. Printed in the USA March, 2020.
ABOUT US