|Articles|March 7, 2013

ISR Reports Breaks Down: 2013 Late Phase Market Overview and Outlook

Author(s)Jeremy Klein

This blog entry is based off ISR’s “2013 Late Phase Market Overview and Outlook” report, which was developed based on data from 129 industry professionals with responsibility for Late Phase study conduct and outsourcing. The report includes market data and analysis on Phase IV, Phase IIIb, HEOR, registries, and comparative effectiveness studies.

Late Phase Study Conduct and Outsourced Opportunity
Consistent with much of ISR’s research, study sponsors report a high degree of outsourcing of Late Phase studies (ranging from between 48-61% depending on study type); typically more than in earlier phases of development. Respondents anticipate they will be outsourcing at least one-half of their late phase study budgets over the next 12 months.

Study specific volume and outsourcing - Respondents are clear in their expectations that Phase IV studies will be on the rise, both in terms of total studies conducted and those outsourced.

Late Phase Study Conduct and Outsourced Opportunity

“Regardless of whether studies are conducted in-house or outsourced, for each of the following types of late phase studies, please indicate the growth or decline in the total number of studies your company will conduct in 2014.”  (Base = 129 respondents)
 
“Now, for the studies that your company outsources, for each of the following types of late phase studies, please indicate the growth or decline in the number of outsourced studies your company will conduct in 2014.”  (Base = 129 respondents)


All data points for the above chart are available in ISR’s full report. The following study types are excluded from the above chart: Clinical experience trials, Compliance / adherence, Disease registries, Expanded access programs (EAP), Head-to-head comparative effectiveness (CER), Health Economics Outcomes Research (HEOR), Medical / Product utilization, Patient reported outcomes (PRO), Pharmacoepidemiologic studies, Phase IIIb, pregnancy registries, Product registries, and Risk Management Programs (RMP).Late Phase Service Delivery
One of the major topics covered in ISR’s report is service quality of clinical service providers; more specifically the characteristics of a service provider that drive “satisfaction” and “loyalty.”

As was the case the first time ISR visited Late Phase market dynamics in 2010, respondents in the 2013 report indicate that satisfaction, and to a degree loyalty, revolves around timelines’ management and (relatedly) site/patient recruitment effectiveness.


Related to this article

© photon_photo - © photon_photo - stock.adobe.com
Standardized measurement across five oncology centers found that clinical research coordinators rated eSource-enabled workflows positively (Overall Mean Satisfaction 5.79 of 7), with reduced manual entry and electronic data transfer earning strong marks, while perceived reduction in sponsor and monitor queries lagged as the one domain below threshold.
Where the Industry Is Headed as Clinical, Operational, and Real-World Data Connect
In this video interview, Rajneesh Patil, global head of AI, digital, and innovation in clinical development at Syneos Health, describes the industry’s trajectory toward a unified intelligence orchestration environment—and explains why the future isn’t one model that knows everything, but a trusted system that brings the right evidence to the right human decision.
What Expanding AI Ecosystems Mean for Sponsor Complexity and Oversight
In this video interview, Rajneesh Patil, global head of AI, digital, and innovation in clinical development at Syneos Health, argues that CROs must act as orchestrators rather than aggregators—and that the real test of any AI ecosystem is whether it reduces sponsor coordination burden or just hands it back to them.