CRO QUALITY BENCHMARKING – PHASE II/III SERVICE …...cro f cro g cro h cro i cro j cro k Industry...

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


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


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


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


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



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




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)




114466

Worldwide Clinical Trials (Base=11)



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


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.


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

CRO QUALITY BENCHMARKING – PHASE II/III SERVICE …...cro f cro g cro h cro i cro j cro k Industry...

Documents

Transcript of CRO QUALITY BENCHMARKING – PHASE II/III SERVICE …...cro f cro g cro h cro i cro j cro k Industry...