Production, Manufacturing and LogisticsPlanning for demand failure: A dynamic lot size model for clinical trial supply chains
Introduction
For every new drug that reaches a pharmacy’s shelf, roughly 5000–10,000 other potential medicines have failed to achieve commercialization (Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, 2009). For a pharmaceutical or bio-tech company attempting to create a new medicine or treatment, failure is not a surprise, but rather an event to be planned for. In this paper, we analyze the impact of failure during clinical trials on the production-inventory decisions for investigational drugs and discover that an extension of the Wagner–Whitin model (Wagner and Whitin, 1958) can greatly improve efficiency in the clinical trial supply chain.
One of the most important hurdles prior to the US Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) approval of a new drug is the testing of a drug candidate in clinical trials. Three phases of clinical trials are usually required to test both safety and efficacy of a potential treatment in human subjects. Typically, Phase I involves 50–100 healthy individuals, Phase II recruits a few hundred potential patients, and Phase III seeks to test the drug candidate in a few thousand patients. While we may know how many patients are needed in each phase of the clinical trial, there is an inherent uncertainty associated with each trial: the risk of failure. Indeed, only 21.5% of drug candidates entering clinical trials actually achieve FDA approval (DiMasi et al., 2003). Many of these drug candidates that fail to pass through the clinical trial hurdle are well documented in the financial press. Below is just one example from the New York Times (Berenson, 2006):
The news came to Pfizer’s chief scientist, Dr. John L. LaMattina, as he was showering at 7 a.m. Saturday: the company’s most promising experimental drug, intended to treat heart disease, actually caused an increase in deaths and heart problems. Eighty-two people had died so far in a clinical trial, versus 51 people in the same trial who had not taken it.
Within hours, Pfizer, the world’s largest drug maker, told more than 100 trial investigators to stop giving patients the drug, called torcetrapib. Shortly after 9 p.m. Saturday, Pfizer announced that it had pulled the plug on the medicine entirely, turning the company’s nearly $1 billion investment in it into a total loss.
The small success rate of clinical trials is painful to a pharmaceutical company’s balance sheet because of the enormous amounts of time, labor, and materials required to perform a clinical trial. On average, 37% of the $100 billion R&D spending by pharmaceutical companies is spent on the clinical trial process (Cutting Edge Information, 2004, Thomson CenterWatch, 2007). Annual supply chain spending for drugs under clinical trials can be substantial, e.g., accounting for 20% or more of a company’s research and development spending.1 For just one drug candidate, a company can spend millions of dollars every quarter to produce supplies for just one clinical trial. When failure in a clinical trial occurs, every dollar spent on manufacturing, packaging, and distribution of unused clinical trial supplies is wasted and in most cases, unused material must be returned to a proper disposal facility for destruction (English and Ma, 2007). For example, Cotherix Inc., estimated $126,000 in destruction costs for an obsolete drug that was valued at $1.5 million (Cotherix Inc., 2006).
It would be unfair of us to label all post-failure drug supply as waste. Inventory is needed to ensure that as patients are recruited to participate in the study, drug supply is available. Any delays in this phase of testing become one less day of patent protection available to the drug. According to Clemento (1999), every extra day of patent availability is worth $1 million for a typical drug. Since patient recruitment is the typical bottleneck in conducting clinical trials, a shortage of clinical drug is considered an unacceptable delay and our model assumes no backlogging of demand. That being said, one would usually be economically foolish to produce enough supply to support all three phases of a clinical trial at once.
Production of investigational drugs is typically characterized by high costs (both fixed and variable) due to the low demand volume, low yield and the premature manufacturing process. In addition, at each step in the synthesis of the chemical compounds, rigorous quality control procedures are required to ensure that investigational drugs “are consistently produced and controlled to the quality standards appropriate to their intended use” (George, 2005). Often, active ingredient production for a drug candidate is a costly process and may require unique manufacturing equipment and processes. Thus, both the fixed and variable production costs tend to be much higher for investigational drugs than approved drugs which have been scaled up for mass production.
In this paper, we present a mathematical model for production planning to balance the two opposing forces of (1) high fixed production costs pushing for large lot sizes and (2) high failure costs which favor smaller lot sizes. High fixed costs for production, in the form of both time and money, lend support to producing large lot sizes. Alternatively, the high risk of failure, the high production variable cost and inventory carrying cost argue for smaller lot sizes. Smaller lot sizes would avoid wasting unused clinical drug supplies as well as the significant cost of destroying the unused material, but can result in high costs due to multiple production setups and more numerous quality control activities. We accommodate this environment by generalizing the Wagner–Whitin (W–W) model (Wagner and Whitin, 1958) to incorporate a stochastic component, namely, the risk of failure. We will refer to this model as the failure-risk model. By investigating the failure-risk model, we are able to make the following contributions:
- •
We demonstrate how every failure-risk model is equivalent to a corresponding deterministic W–W model if one adjusts the cost parameters properly to reflect failure risk and destruction costs, so many classic results of the W–W model still apply. Most interestingly, the planning horizon theorem indicates that in the failure-risk model, updating failure probabilities as the clinical trial proceeds does not affect the optimal supply decisions under certain conditions.
- •
We conduct a comprehensive numerical study using various environments that clinical trial manufacturers may face. We show that the failure-risk model can lead to substantial costs savings as compared to using the W–W model which ignores the risk of failure.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. We review the related literature in Section 2. The model and analysis are presented in Section 3, and their extensions are discussed in Section 4. The potential benefits of properly accounting for failure are shown in an illustrative example in Section 5. A more thorough numerical study to test the effectiveness of the model under real-world scenarios is performed in Section 6 with implications within industry discussed in Section 7. Finally, we summarize the paper and discuss future research directions in Section 8.
Section snippets
Literature review
Because of the interdisciplinary nature of this work, we shall first review literature that relates the disciplines of production planning and clinical research. Then, we highlight papers on dynamic economic lot size models and stochastic inventory models. Finally, we turn our attention to literature on research and development (R&D) supply chains.
Qualitative investigations of drug supply decisions made within the clinical trial process are found in the medical and pharmaceutical literature.
The model
Consider an investigational drug in a clinical trial over a finite time horizon with periods ranging from t = 1, 2, … , N. We assume that demand is known for the drug in all periods (see justifications in Section 2). Demand and costs in each period are nonnegative. If the trial succeeds at the end of period t, we make production decisions and move to next period. Otherwise, we stop and all remaining inventory is wasted and is recycled or destroyed. The known demand must be satisfied and no backorders
Extensions
In this section, we consider two extensions of the model in Section 3 to incorporate real-world situations: general concave cost functions and production/storage constraints.
An illustrative example
In this section, we demonstrate that accounting for demand failure when planning a production schedule can lead to substantial cost savings over using the Wagner–Whitin model ignoring the failure risk. To develop insight, we consider a special case of Phase II clinical trials with stationary data where ct = $75, rt = $25, ht = $5, dt = 250 and st = $50,000 (t = 1, 2, … , 12). Note that both ht and dt are defined per period where a period equals 2 months here. We consider a 12-period (2 years) planning horizon
Numerical study of potential savings
In this section, we conduct a comprehensive numerical study to gauge the potential savings of incorporating failure risk into production planning by solving various environments that clinical trial manufacturers may face. From our discussions with industry professionals, most clinical supply managers plan for success despite knowing that failure is both likely and costly. Thus, given our assumptions, the best plan to use as a benchmark, would be the optimal plan as given by the Wagner–Whitin
Industry notes
Mapping the results of our analysis to industry, we expect the failure-risk model to have the most significant impact for drugs that have a high probability of failure, sufficiently high production costs and relatively low inventory holding costs. Since it is hard to characterize holding and production costs for a certain clinical trial environment, we comment only on the probability of failure that is seen during clinical trials. In pharmaceutical and bio-tech industries, we see below-average
Conclusion
This paper applies operations management models to clinical trial drug supply chains and demonstrates their potential impact. Specifically, we consider a class of dynamic economic lot size models under the risk of demand failure – the failure-risk models. We show that the stochastic failure-risk models can be transformed to corresponding W–W models where only the cost parameters need to be adjusted according to the failure risk and destruction cost. Therefore, many of the classic results for
Acknowledgments
This research is supported by the grant CMMI-0747779 from the National Science Foundation. We thank Dr. Indranil Nandi from Sandoz Inc., A Novartis Company, and Lee Resnick from Deloitte Consulting LLP for informative discussions on drug development processes and clinical trial practices. We also thank seminar participants for their feedback at the “Clinical Trials Supply Management for Pharmaceuticals” conference held in Philadelphia, June 23–25, 2008.
References (58)
- et al.
A stochastic programming approach for clinical trial planning in new drug development
Computers and Chemical Engineering
(2008) - et al.
Scheduling of testing tasks and resource planning in new product development using stochastic programming
Computers and Chemical Engineering
(2009) - et al.
Modeling methods and a branch and cut algorithm for pharmaceutical clinical trial planning using stochastic programming
European Journal of Operational Research
(2010) - et al.
Lot sizing for a product subject to obsolescence or perishability
European Journal of Operational Research
(1994) - et al.
A hierarchical solution approach for multi-site capacity planning under uncertainty in the pharmaceutical industry
Computers and Chemical Engineering
(2004) Pharmaceutical supply chains: Key issues and strategies for optimisation
Computers and Chemical Engineering
(2004)- et al.
Multi-product lot-sizing with a transportation capacity reservation contract
European Journal of Operational Research
(2005) - Allos Therapeutics Inc., 1999–2007. Form 10-K for the Fiscal Years 1995–2006. <http://ir.allos.com/> (retrieved...
- et al.
Improved algorithms for economic lot size problems
Operations Research
(1993) - Ariad Pharmaceuticals Inc., 2010. Form 10-K for the Fiscal Years 2009. <http://www.ariad.com/> (retrieved...
End of drug trial is a big loss for Pfizer
New York Times
Integrating drug supply issues with strategic preclinical and clinical development
Drug Information Journal
Managing a portfolio of interdependent new product candidates in the pharmaceutical industry
Journal of Product Innovation Management
Dynamic modeling of inventories subject to obsolescence
Management Science
An economic lot-sizing problem with perishable inventory and economies of scale costs: Approximation solutions and worst case analysis
Naval Research Logistics
New and integrated approaches to successful accelerated drug development
Drug Information Journal
A dynamic-programming approach to continuous-review obsolescence inventory problems
Naval Research Logistics
Risks in new drug development: Approval success rates for investigational drugs
Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics
The price of innovation: New estimates of drug development costs
Journal of Health Economics
R&D costs and returns by therapeutic category
Drug Information Journal
The cost of biopharmaceutical R&D: Is biotech different?
Managerial and Decision Economics
Trends in risks associated with new drug development: Success rates for investigational drugs
Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
From cradle to grave
Applied Clinical Trials
Extensions of planning horizon theorem in the dynamic lot size model
Management Science
A simple forward algorithm to solve general dynamic lot sizing models with n periods in O(n log n) or O(n) time
Management Science
Deterministic production planning: Algorithms and complexity
Management Science
A predictive cost model in lot-sizing methodology, with specific reference to aircraft parts inventory: An appraisal
Production and Inventory Management Journal
Cited by (24)
An interactive fuzzy programming approach for a sustainable supplier selection under textile supply chain management
2021, Computers and Industrial EngineeringDecision-support challenges in the chemical-pharmaceutical industry: Findings and future research directions
2020, Computers and Chemical EngineeringCitation Excerpt :In all of these works, the focus is only on the area of Production/Distribution. In the NPD phase, only limited considerations can be found in the form of penalty costs associated to waste generation due to the limited product lifetime or to the unused final product at the end of clinical trials (Fleischhacker and Zhao, 2011; Chen et al., 2012a, 2012b; Marques et al., 2017b). Another interesting observation is that despite the increased interest in continuous manufacturing, very few works considered in this analysis explicitly address planning problems in alternative technological settings or technology related decisions.
Production planning in a two-level supply chain for production-time-dependent products with dynamic demands
2019, Computers and Industrial EngineeringCitation Excerpt :After the work of Wagner and Whitin (1958), there have been many studies related to DLSP. Among them, Aggarwal and Park (1993), Federgruen and Tzur (1991) and Wagelmans, Van Hoesel, and Kolen (1992), Fleischhacker and Zhao (2011) suggest optimal solution algorithms. There are also many heuristic algorithms for solving DLSPs and multi-level lot-sizing problems.
A multi-objective production planning problem with the consideration of time and cost in clinical trials
2019, Expert Systems with ApplicationsCitation Excerpt :By considering each drug's failure rate, Gatica, Papageorgiou, and Shah (2003) optimized the production schedule for a certain number of clinical drugs with the finite available manufacturing resources. Fleischhacker and Zhao (2011) demonstrated that for a clinical drug with deterministic demand, the Wagner-Whitin model could be generalized by incorporating the drug's failure risk and the salvage cost of leftover drugs to find the optimal production decisions. They also considered the demand uncertainty and determined the production time and quantities in a two-period production model based on the first period's demand realization (A. J. Fleischhacker & Zhao, 2013).
New Product Development and Supply Chains in the Pharmaceutical Industry
2018, Computer Aided Chemical EngineeringCitation Excerpt :The CTM may also involve cold-chain requirements and thus additional knowledge: security by protecting the product against damage, loss, or theft, maintenance of cold-chain conditions in the air and on the ground, planning, adaptability, and contingency plans to ensure supply continuity. This problem is generally dealt with in the literature by the use of simulation models (stochastic models for the tests and the selection of the group of patients or models by discrete events), coupled or not to optimization methods (Kimko and Duffull, 2003; Dowlman et al., 2004; Peterson et al., 2004; McGarvey et al., 2007; Abdelkafi et al., 2009; Fleischhacker and Zhao, 2011; Chen et al., 2012). The review presented in Shah (2005) provides a state-of-the-art supply chain optimization in the chemical industry, including network location and design, production capacity management, inventory management, and production scheduling.
Medicine supply chain model for an integrated healthcare system with uncertain product complaints
2018, Journal of Manufacturing SystemsCitation Excerpt :The quality of the supply chain process and products is as important as other operational performance measures such as lead time and cost. Fleischhacker and Zhao [18] examined optimal lot production order for clinical trial supply chains and investigated the effectiveness of medicine during human testing while evaluating the suppliers with dynamic programming. Most of the quality issues studied in the healthcare supply chain are based on qualitative approaches.