IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ordeca/v19y2022i4p337-353.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Supporting Innovation in Early-Stage Pharmaceutical Development Decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Florian Methling

    (Decision Theory and Financial Services Group, Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule Aachen University, 52062 Aachen, Germany; Strategic Decisions Group, 40221 Düsseldorf, Germany)

  • Steffen A. Borden

    (Bayer Pharmaceuticals, 13353 Berlin, Germany)

  • Deepak Veeraraghavan

    (Strategic Decisions Group, 40221 Düsseldorf, Germany)

  • Insa Sommer

    (Strategic Decisions Group, 40221 Düsseldorf, Germany)

  • Johannes Ulrich Siebert

    (MCI Management Center Innsbruck, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria)

  • Rüdiger von Nitzsch

    (Decision Theory and Financial Services Group, Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule Aachen University, 52062 Aachen, Germany)

  • Mark Seidler

    (Strategic Decisions Group, 40221 Düsseldorf, Germany)

Abstract

Pharmaceutical companies have frequent portfolio reviews to monitor development progress and prioritize development assets. The earliest assets are drug candidates whose efficacy is unknown and whose effects on the human body have yet to be fully investigated. These assets are characterized by a high degree of uncertainty in reaching the market and in being used in clinical practice. In addition, not all potential applications are foreseen and can often be very different. In the absence of satisfactory methods for making decisions on resource allocation among early development assets, decision makers focus almost exclusively on assessments of an asset’s probability of technical success. This study proposes a more holistic methodology to support early-stage pharmaceutical development decisions using value-focused thinking and multicriteria decision making. The methodology operates within the decision quality framework and provides a consistent evaluation of various early development assets across a diverse set of disease areas. This combination of concepts and methodologies has been implemented and proven valuable at Bayer Pharmaceuticals, which needed a new, more robust decision-making process for early development. Thus, this study discusses how to enable concrete trade-offs at the level of corporate objectives to align, communicate, and translate corporate strategy into portfolio strategy. In addition, this study presents learnings for decision analysts and decision makers in the pharmaceutical industry on how to develop a set of fundamental objectives, how to create scales to operationalize these objectives, and how to take steps to debias an organizational decision-making process.

Suggested Citation

  • Florian Methling & Steffen A. Borden & Deepak Veeraraghavan & Insa Sommer & Johannes Ulrich Siebert & Rüdiger von Nitzsch & Mark Seidler, 2022. "Supporting Innovation in Early-Stage Pharmaceutical Development Decisions," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 19(4), pages 337-353, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ordeca:v:19:y:2022:i:4:p:337-353
    DOI: 10.1287/deca.2022.0452
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/deca.2022.0452
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/deca.2022.0452?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hartmann, Marcus & Hassan, Ali, 2006. "Application of real options analysis for pharmaceutical R&D project valuation--Empirical results from a survey," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 343-354, April.
    2. Bana e Costa, Carlos A. & Ensslin, Leonardo & Correa, Emerson C. & Vansnick, Jean-Claude, 1999. "Decision Support Systems in action: Integrated application in a multicriteria decision aid process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 113(2), pages 315-335, March.
    3. Johannes Ulrich Siebert & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 2020. "Comparative Analysis of Terrorists’ Objectives Hierarchies," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 17(2), pages 97-114, June.
    4. Maarten J. IJzerman & Hendrik Koffijberg & Elisabeth Fenwick & Murray Krahn, 2017. "Emerging Use of Early Health Technology Assessment in Medical Product Development: A Scoping Review of the Literature," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 35(7), pages 727-740, July.
    5. Ralph L. Keeney, 1994. "Using Values in Operations Research," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 42(5), pages 793-813, October.
    6. Jeffrey S. Stonebraker, 2002. "How Bayer Makes Decisions to Develop New Drugs," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 32(6), pages 77-90, December.
    7. Dennis M. Buede, 1986. "Structuring Value Attributes," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 16(2), pages 52-62, April.
    8. Maarten Ijzerman & Lotte Steuten, 2011. "Early assessment of medical technologies to inform product development and market access," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 9(5), pages 331-347, September.
    9. James E. Smith & James S. Dyer, 2021. "On (Measurable) Multiattribute Value Functions: An Expository Argument," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 18(4), pages 247-256, December.
    10. Ralph L. Keeney, 2002. "Common Mistakes in Making Value Trade-Offs," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 50(6), pages 935-945, December.
    11. James S. Dyer & Rakesh K. Sarin, 1979. "Measurable Multiattribute Value Functions," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 810-822, August.
    12. Panos Kanavos & Olivier Wouters & Aris Angelis & Panos Kanavos & Gilberto Montibeller, 2017. "Resource Allocation and Priority Setting in Health Care: A Multi-criteria Decision Analysis Problem of Value?," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 8, pages 76-83, March.
    13. Ronald A. Howard, 1988. "Decision Analysis: Practice and Promise," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(6), pages 679-695, June.
    14. repec:bla:glopol:v:8:y:2017:i:s2:p:76-83 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Johannes Siebert & Ralph L. Keeney, 2015. "Creating More and Better Alternatives for Decisions Using Objectives," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 63(5), pages 1144-1158, October.
    16. Rüdiger von Nitzsch & Martin Weber, 1993. "The Effect of Attribute Ranges on Weights in Multiattribute Utility Measurements," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(8), pages 937-943, August.
    17. Gilberto Montibeller & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 2015. "Cognitive and Motivational Biases in Decision and Risk Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(7), pages 1230-1251, July.
    18. Johannes Siebert, 2016. "Can Novices Create Alternatives of the Same Quality as Experts?," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 13(4), pages 278-291, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dimitrios Gouglas & Kendall Hoyt & Elizabeth Peacocke & Aristidis Kaloudis & Trygve Ottersen & John-Arne Røttingen, 2019. "Setting Strategic Objectives for the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations: An Exploratory Decision Analysis Process," Service Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(6), pages 430-446, November.
    2. Siebert, Johannes Ulrich & Kunz, Reinhard E. & Rolf, Philipp, 2021. "Effects of decision training on individuals’ decision-making proactivity," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 294(1), pages 264-282.
    3. Johannes Ulrich Siebert & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 2020. "Comparative Analysis of Terrorists’ Objectives Hierarchies," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 17(2), pages 97-114, June.
    4. Sara J. M. Abdeen & Florian Methling & Rüdiger Nitzsch, 2024. "Incomplete Objectives in Decision Making: How Omitting Objectives Affects Identifying the Most Promising Alternative," SN Operations Research Forum, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 1-13, December.
    5. Angelis, A. & Linch, M. & Montibeller, G. & Molina-Lopez, T. & Zawada, A. & Orzel, K. & Arickx, F. & Espin, J. & Kanavos, P., 2020. "Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis for HTA across four EU Member States: Piloting the Advance Value Framework," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 246(C).
    6. Angelis, Aris & Kanavos, Panos, 2017. "Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) for evaluating new medicines in Health Technology Assessment and beyond: The Advance Value Framework," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 137-156.
    7. Gilberto Montibeller & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 2015. "Cognitive and Motivational Biases in Decision and Risk Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(7), pages 1230-1251, July.
    8. Robin L. Dillon & Vicki M. Bier & Richard Sheffield John & Abdullah Althenayyan, 2023. "Closing the Gap Between Decision Analysis and Policy Analysts Before the Next Pandemic," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 20(2), pages 109-132, June.
    9. Melissa Garber & Shahram Sarkani & Thomas Mazzuchi, 2017. "A Framework for Multiobjective Decision Management with Diverse Stakeholders," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(4), pages 335-356, July.
    10. A Morton & B Fasolo, 2009. "Behavioural decision theory for multi-criteria decision analysis: a guided tour," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(2), pages 268-275, February.
    11. Franco, L. Alberto & Hämäläinen, Raimo P. & Rouwette, Etiënne A.J.A. & Leppänen, Ilkka, 2021. "Taking stock of behavioural OR: A review of behavioural studies with an intervention focus," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 293(2), pages 401-418.
    12. Bana e Costa, Carlos A. & Oliveira, Mónica D. & Rodrigues, Teresa C. & Vieira, Ana C.L., 2023. "Desirability–doability group judgment framework for the collaborative multicriteria evaluation of public policies," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 118192, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    13. Wang, Yi & Rattanavipapong, Waranya & Teerawattananon, Yot, 2021. "Using health technology assessment to set priority, inform target product profiles, and design clinical study for health innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    14. Carland, Corinne & Goentzel, Jarrod & Montibeller, Gilberto, 2018. "Modeling the values of private sector agents in multi-echelon humanitarian supply chains," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 269(2), pages 532-543.
    15. Rowan Iskandar & Carlo Federici & Cassandra Berns & Carl Rudolf Blankart, 2022. "An approach to quantify parameter uncertainty in early assessment of novel health technologies," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(S1), pages 116-134, September.
    16. Mónica D. Oliveira & Inês Mataloto & Panos Kanavos, 2019. "Multi-criteria decision analysis for health technology assessment: addressing methodological challenges to improve the state of the art," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(6), pages 891-918, August.
    17. Marttunen, Mika & Haara, Arto & Hjerppe, Turo & Kurttila, Mikko & Liesiö, Juuso & Mustajoki, Jyri & Saarikoski, Heli & Tolvanen, Anne, 2023. "Parallel and comparative use of three multicriteria decision support methods in an environmental portfolio problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 307(2), pages 842-859.
    18. Tianjun Feng & L. Robin Keller, 2006. "A Multiple-Objective Decision Analysis for Terrorism Protection: Potassium Iodide Distribution in Nuclear Incidents," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 3(2), pages 76-93, June.
    19. Scholz, Michael & Dorner, Verena & Schryen, Guido & Benlian, Alexander, 2017. "A configuration-based recommender system for supporting e-commerce decisions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 259(1), pages 205-215.
    20. Ralph L. Keeney, 2002. "Common Mistakes in Making Value Trade-Offs," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 50(6), pages 935-945, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ordeca:v:19:y:2022:i:4:p:337-353. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.