Literature DB >> 33164100

Examining association between cohesion and diversity in collaboration networks of pharmaceutical clinical trials with drug approvals.

Gary Lin1,2, Sauleh Siddiqui3, Jen Bernstein4, Diego A Martinez1,2, Lauren Gardner5,6, Tenley Albright7, Takeru Igusa5,6.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Clinical trials ensure that pharmaceutical treatments are safe, efficacious, and effective for public consumption, but are extremely complex, taking up to 10 years and $2.6 billion to complete. One main source of complexity arises from the collaboration between actors, and network science methodologies can be leveraged to explore that complexity. We aim to characterize collaborations between actors in the clinical trials context and investigate trends of successful actors.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We constructed a temporal network of clinical trial collaborations between large and small-size pharmaceutical companies, academic institutions, nonprofit organizations, hospital systems, and government agencies from public and proprietary data and introduced metrics to quantify actors' collaboration network structure, organizational behavior, and partnership characteristics. A multivariable regression analysis was conducted to determine the metrics' relationship with success.
RESULTS: We found a positive correlation between the number of successful approved trials and interdisciplinary collaborations measured by a collaboration diversity metric (P < .01). Our results also showed a negative effect of the local clustering coefficient (P < .01) on the success of clinical trials. Large pharmaceutical companies have the lowest local clustering coefficient and more diversity in partnerships across biomedical specializations.
CONCLUSIONS: Large pharmaceutical companies are more likely to collaborate with a wider range of actors from other specialties, especially smaller industry actors who are newcomers in clinical research, resulting in exclusive access to smaller actors. Future investigations are needed to show how concentrations of influence and resources might result in diminished gains in treatment development.
© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Keywords:  clinical research; collaboration network; complex system; network science; science of science

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33164100      PMCID: PMC7810455          DOI: 10.1093/jamia/ocaa243

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc        ISSN: 1067-5027            Impact factor:   4.497


  8 in total

1.  Public-private partnerships for health: their main targets, their diversity, and their future directions.

Authors:  R Widdus
Journal:  Bull World Health Organ       Date:  2001-10-24       Impact factor: 9.408

2.  Collective dynamics of 'small-world' networks.

Authors:  D J Watts; S H Strogatz
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1998-06-04       Impact factor: 49.962

Review 3.  Racing to define pharmaceutical R&D external innovation models.

Authors:  Liangsu Wang; Andrew Plump; Michael Ringel
Journal:  Drug Discov Today       Date:  2014-10-30       Impact factor: 7.851

4.  Innovation in the pharmaceutical industry: New estimates of R&D costs.

Authors:  Joseph A DiMasi; Henry G Grabowski; Ronald W Hansen
Journal:  J Health Econ       Date:  2016-02-12       Impact factor: 3.883

5.  Shorter distances between papers over time are due to more cross-field references and increased citation rate to higher-impact papers.

Authors:  Attila Varga
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2019-10-14       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  A better lemon squeezer? Maximum-likelihood regression with beta-distributed dependent variables.

Authors:  Michael Smithson; Jay Verkuilen
Journal:  Psychol Methods       Date:  2006-03

Review 7.  Are me-too drugs justified?

Authors:  S Garattini
Journal:  J Nephrol       Date:  1997 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.902

8.  The database for aggregate analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov (AACT) and subsequent regrouping by clinical specialty.

Authors:  Asba Tasneem; Laura Aberle; Hari Ananth; Swati Chakraborty; Karen Chiswell; Brian J McCourt; Ricardo Pietrobon
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-03-16       Impact factor: 3.240

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.