OUR SERVICES
OUR SERVICES
OUR SERVICES
OUR SERVICES

5 Root Causes of Budget Overages in Clinical Trials: How FSP Models Can Help

The Persistent Challenge of Budget Overages in Clinical Trials

Every year, biopharmaceutical and pharmaceutical companies conducting clinical trials incur billions of dollars in budget overages. Despite utilizing advanced planning tools and sophisticated management systems, these financial overruns persist industry-wide. While many view these overruns as inevitable, our analysis has identified five distinct and addressable root causes. This article examines each factor in detail and discusses how Functional Service Provider (FSP) models present a strategic solution for organizations seeking to optimize their clinical trial budgets.

Understanding Clinical Trial Budget Management Lifecycle

To contextualize the root causes of budget overages, let us first overview the clinical trial budget lifecycle. This process involves more than initial financial planning; it demands continuous monitoring and strategic adjustments. According to the Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD), industry investment in pharmaceutical research and development is approximately twice as large as the public contribution. The relationship between trial duration and outcomes varies significantly between private and public funding models, creating unique challenges for budget management.

This lifecycle encompasses:

  1. Initial budget planning and forecasting
  2. Ongoing budget management during trial execution
  3. Continuous monitoring and adjustment
  4. Final reconciliation and analysis

The complexity of clinical trial budgeting becomes clearer when we examine the funding landscape. While public funding dominates the earliest stages of drug development, it becomes less prevalent in later research stages, creating a complex financial ecosystem that demands careful navigation.

Root Causes and Their FSP Solutions

1. Root Causes at the Planning Stage

  • Inaccurate cost estimations: Underestimating the true costs of a trial can set a trial on a precarious financial path from the outset.
  • Overly optimistic timelines: Time truly equates to money in clinical research, and unrealistic schedules lead to costly delays.
  • Inadequate risk assessment: Failure to anticipate challenges may necessitate expensive corrective actions.

FSP Solution: FSP partners offer a solution to these planning-stage issues by leveraging their extensive experience across multiple trials and therapeutic areas. They can provide more accurate cost estimates, develop realistic timelines, and conduct comprehensive risk assessments based on real-world data.

This complex financing structure, where public insurance covers a significant portion of drug expenditures (over 40% in the US alone), makes accurate cost estimation particularly challenging as trials must account for various reimbursement scenarios and stakeholder requirements.

2. Root Causes During Trial Execution

Patient recruitment and retention issues: Difficulty in enrolling patients in a clinical trial can result in costly delays or even termination.

Site management inefficiencies: Poor site selection and management can lead to costly delays and data quality issues.

Unexpected protocol changes: Mid-trial amendments can escalate costs, compromising the financial viability and overall success of the clinical trial.

FSP Solution: FSP models shine in addressing these execution-phase challenges and offer flexibility in resource allocation. They can quickly ramp up recruitment efforts, provide experienced site managers, and adapt swiftly to protocol changes without the overhead of full-time staff.

3. Technology-Related Causes

  • Outdated or incompatible systems: Technology-related setbacks can cause operational inefficiencies, delays, and increased expenses.
  • Data management and quality issues: Poor data quality leads to rework, extending timelines and inflating budgets.

FSP Solution: FSP partners often come equipped with cutting-edge technologies and expertise in data management. They can seamlessly integrate with existing systems and ensure high-quality data collection and analysis, mitigating these technology-related budget risks.

4. Human Factor Causes

  • Skill gaps and training needs: Lack of expertise in specific areas can lead to inefficiencies and errors.
  • Communication breakdowns: Poor coordination between teams can result in duplicated efforts and missed opportunities.
  • Inadequate oversight and governance: Weak management can lead to unchecked spending and scope creep.

FSP Solution: FSP models address these human factor issues by providing access to specialized skills on demand. They offer experienced project managers who can enhance communication and provide robust oversight, filling skill gaps without the need for long-term hires.

5. External Factors Contributing to Budget Overages

The interplay between public and private funding sources creates unique budget challenges, particularly when research needs and market incentives do not align. Research shows that investment levels vary significantly based on the target patient population’s ability to pay, creating additional budgetary pressures for global trials.

  • Regulatory changes: Shifting regulatory landscapes can necessitate costly trial adjustments.
  • Market dynamics: Beyond resource and currency fluctuations, the relationship between research investment and expected outcomes significantly impacts budget planning and execution.
  • Funding model dynamics: The balance between public and private funding creates complex budget considerations, especially when market demands, and research priorities diverge.

FSP Solution: FSP partners, with their global presence and deep understanding of both public and private sector dynamics, can help navigate these complex external challenges. Their experience across different funding models enables them to optimize costs while maintaining research quality and compliance.

The Cascading Effects of Budget Overages

Budget overages do not just hit the bottom line. They can trigger a domino effect:

    • Delayed time-to-market, potentially costing millions in lost revenue
    • Compromised data quality if corners are cut to save costs
    • Strained relationships with sites and vendors
    • Reduced investor confidence

Innovative Approaches to Preventing Budget Overages

Modern clinical trial management is evolving to embrace innovative funding mechanisms. Advanced market commitments and subscription models are emerging as effective tools for budget management. These approaches represent a shift from traditional funding models and offer new ways to control costs while maintaining research quality.

Key strategies include:

  1. Implement comprehensive data-driven planning: Analyze historical data, funding model impacts, and performance metrics for more accurate forecasting.
  2. Implement continuous monitoring: Use real-time data to catch and address issues early.
  3. Adopt flexible staffing models: FSP partnerships allow for scalable, on-demand expertise.
  4. Invest in site relationships: Strong site partnerships lead to more efficient trials.
  5. Invest in technology: Integrate tools that enhance efficiency and data quality.

Conclusion: Towards a More Financially Sustainable Clinical Trial Model

The narrative around budget overages in clinical trials is changing. No longer accepted as an unavoidable cost of doing business, these financial challenges are now seen as opportunities for optimization. Through comprehensive understanding of these root causes and strategic deployment of FSP models, sponsors can enhance clinical research productivity, reduce costs, and expedite the development of life-changing therapies faster and more reliably.

Maxis Clinical’s tailored FSP Models are specifically designed to address these precise pain points, providing adaptable expertise and resources to optimize clinical trial operations.

Every dollar saved is a dollar that can be reinvested in innovative research. By controlling budget overages head-on, we are not just protecting the bottom line – we are accelerating the pace of medical innovation. Everyone benefits when clinical trials run efficiently and effectively, and that is a win-win for everyone involved.

References

1) Budish, Eric, Benjamin N. Roin, and Heidi Williams. 2015. “Do Firms Underinvest in Long-Term Research? Evidence from Cancer Clinical Trials.” American Economic Review, 105 (7): 2044–85 – https://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/aer.20131176

2) Matthey, M.A., Hollis, A. Pull me – push you? The disparate financing mechanisms of drug research in global health. Global Health 20, 14 (2024): https://globalizationandhealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12992-024-01019-x

SHARE

Latest Blogs