IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/spr/sprchp/978-3-319-09075-7_11.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Dynamically Optimizing Budget Allocation for Phase 3 Drug Development Portfolios Incorporating Uncertainty in the Pipeline

In: Optimization of Pharmaceutical R&D Programs and Portfolios

Author

Listed:
  • Nitin R. Patel

    (Cytel Inc.
    Massachusetts Institute of Technology)

  • Suresh Ankolekar

    (Maastricht School of Management)

Abstract

In this chapter we describe a mathematical approach to maximize the Expected Net Present Value (ENPV) of a portfolio over a planning horizon by determining the optimal designs of Phase 3 (Ph3) trials for a given budget. The model is formulated as a Stochastic Integer Programming (SIP) model that incorporates uncertainty regarding availability of drugs in the pipeline. The SIP model provides an optimal policy that specifies the optimal design for each drug for every possible scenario of availability of future drugs for Ph3 trials. It optimizes the trade-off between committing budget to drugs available for Ph3 funding at any point in time and preserving budget for drugs in the development pipeline that will need funding in the future. Optimizing this trade-off is challenging because it is uncertain which drugs will need funding in the future as they may fail to progress to Ph3. This important trade-off is not handled in a consistent, quantitative way in portfolio budgeting models used in practice today. We have also developed a simulation model to assess the technical, regulatory, and commercial risk of the optimal budget allocation policy. We show how our models can be used for dynamic re-optimization of the portfolio when changes in the internal and external environment occur and as new information becomes available. This capability will enable rapid, frequent, and consistent realignment of the strategy to optimize future use of the budget available for reallocation. We illustrate our approach using an example that shows how our models can be used to decide on the best budget level to meet a target Return on Investment (ROI) and to evaluate risk of the optimal allocation strategy associated with this budget level. We have shown how these models can be used to answer important what-if questions such as those that arise when in-licensing or out-licensing drug development.

Suggested Citation

  • Nitin R. Patel & Suresh Ankolekar, 2015. "Dynamically Optimizing Budget Allocation for Phase 3 Drug Development Portfolios Incorporating Uncertainty in the Pipeline," Springer Books, in: Zoran Antonijevic (ed.), Optimization of Pharmaceutical R&D Programs and Portfolios, edition 127, chapter 0, pages 181-200, Springer.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:sprchp:978-3-319-09075-7_11
    DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-09075-7_11
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mahboubeh Farid & Hampus Hallman & Mikael Palmblad & Johannes Vänngård, 2021. "Multi-Objective Pharmaceutical Portfolio Optimization under Uncertainty of Cost and Return," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(18), pages 1-11, September.
    2. Guido Thommes & Martin Oliver Sailer & Nicolas Bonnet & Alex Carlton & Juan J. Abellan & Veronique Robert, 2022. "Awareness and use of quantitative decision-making methods in pharmaceutical development," Papers 2203.00684, arXiv.org.

    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:spr:sprchp:978-3-319-09075-7_11. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.