Upload
the-avoca-group
View
942
Download
2
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Best Practice Approaches for Proactive Quality Management Partnerships in Clinical Trials Latin America August 14, 2012
2
Best Practice Approaches for Proactive Quality Management
Partnerships in Clinical Trials Latin America
u Specific topics
u Differences in perceptions between sponsors and CROs regarding the quality of outsourced trials
u Best practice approaches
u Industry Consortium focused on creating standards and bridging gaps between sponsors and CROs
3
N
97
96
88
2%
3%
1%
60%
77%
51%
21%
13%
34%
15%
7%
14%
2%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Satisfaction with "quality" from service providers
Overall satisfaction with work of service providers
Satisfaction with value from service providers
Very satisfied Generally satisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Generally dissatisfied Very dissatisfied
Sponsors: Overall Satisfaction with Quality, Service, and Value
2011 Avoca Research: Sponsors’ Satisfaction
4
N
96
97
27%
2%
61%
60%
10%
21%
2%
15% 2%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
CROs
For comparison: Sponsor satisfaction with quality from service providers
Very satisfied Generally satisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Generally dissatisfied Very dissatisfied
Overall, how satisfied have you been with the “quality” that your company has delivered for its sponsors in the last 3 years?
Provider Satisfaction: 2011 Avoca Research
5
On average, how satisfied are you with your CROs’...
10%
8%
6%
6%
3%
3%
2%
3%
56%
44%
38%
44%
48%
48%
48%
38%
30%
33%
48%
34%
35%
31%
34%
37%
4%
13%
8%
14%
12%
13%
10%
22%
2%
1%
3%
5%
5%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Compliance with SOPs and other written procedures
Data quality and integrity
Adequacy of Monitoring Plan
Document control
Audit plans and execution
Monitoring of protocol compliance
Management of protocol compliance
Adherence to Monitoring Plan
Very satisfied Generally satisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Generally dissatisfied Very dissatisfied
N Mean 90 3.7
91 3.4
87 3.4
90 3.4
75 3.4
87 3.3
87 3.3
87 3.2
Sponsors: Satisfaction with Quality
6
On average, how satisfied are you with your CROs’...
3%
3%
3%
4%
3%
2%
1%
33%
40%
35%
36%
31%
36%
34%
46%
33%
44%
37%
40%
32%
34%
16%
23%
16%
21%
23%
24%
27%
1%
1%
2%
2%
3%
6%
4%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Site training
Availability of quality personnel for my projects
Staff training
Efficiency/timeliness in achieving clean data
Communications surrounding quality
Governance of quality (e.g. accountability, management system)
Oversight of third party vendors (e.g. labs, IVRS vendors, etc.)
Very satisfied Generally satisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Generally dissatisfied Very dissatisfied
N Mean
87 3.2
92 3.2
89 3.2
92 3.2
91 3.1
90 3.0
77 3.0
Sponsors: Satisfaction with Quality
7
N=167
7%
34%
59%
Better than the quality delivered by our in-house teams.
The same as the quality delivered by our in-house (sponsor) teams.
Worse than the quality delivered by our in-house teams.
Over the last 3 years, the quality delivered by our CROs has been:
2012 Consortium Assessment: Quality Delivered by CROs
8
Causes of Quality Issues in Outsourced Clinical Trials
Causes of Issues with Quality
u Key themes
u Inability of clinical service providers to consistently perform to their potential due to constraints placed by sponsors:
n Costs
n Processes/procedures
n Timelines
n Decision-making (including about site inclusion/closure)
n Lack of expectation-setting
u Cost pressures on the industry
9
Partnerships in Clinical Trials Latin America
Question: What practices are being followed by those that are
most satisfied with their CROs’ performance?
10
Partnerships in Clinical Trials Latin America
Answer: The companies that are adept at defining
expectations for quality and those that have robust systems for measuring quality.
u Use of written Quality Agreements:
u 94% of sponsors who use written Quality Agreements are satisfied, as opposed to 59% of those who do not use written Quality Agreements
u Use of adequate metrics:
u 94% of sponsors who use adequate metrics are satisfied, as opposed to 64% of those who do not use adequate metrics
11
Use of Quality Agreements: 2012 Consortium Assessment
How often do your teams use written Quality Agreements to establish and document quality expectations in outsourced clinical trials?
N=266
12
How often do your teams use written Quality Agreements to establish and document quality expectations in outsourced clinical trials?*
Use of Quality Agreements: 2012 Consortium Assessment
*p<.0001, company effect / p=ns, function and level effects
Com
pany
: N 19 31 17 12 10 18 15 33 25 11 22 19 24 10 266
13
The Avoca Quality Consortium
Partnerships in Clinical Trials Latin America
Goals
u Short-term: Creation of standards for Quality Management with a focus on developing definitions for quality and standards for measuring quality (Quality Agreements and Quality Metrics)
u Long-term: Develop a new paradigm in the approach to proactive quality management and partnering with CROs to ensure high quality and mitigate risk
14
The Avoca Quality Consortium
Partnerships in Clinical Trials Latin America
Corporate sponsors:
Pharma and Biotech members include: • Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, Biogen Idec, Bristol-Myers
Squibb, Cerexa, Cubist Pharmaceuticals, Eli Lilly and Company, GlaxoSmithKline, Grünenthal, ImClone Systems, Janssen Research & Development, Otsuka, Pfizer, Purdue and Roche.
CRO members include:
• Chiltern International, Covance, INC Research, ICON, Harrison Clinical Research, PAREXEL International, PharmaNet/i3, PRA International, Quintiles, Theorem Clinical Research and RPS.
Thank you!