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 timeconsuming 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.