Supply chain & logistics
[company] looking at each other nervously wondering whether they should be the first to move, is the feeling I get.” The research wing of Deloitte’s Centre for Health Solutions curates reports on digitalisation in the pharma industry, showing real-life cases where visibility was achieved in the supply chain. The reports also look at the role of AI and digital twins in going beyond visibility to add predictability to the supply chain. But for this scenario, Taylor says when she and her team worked on the 2020 report ‘Intelligent drug supply chain: Creating value from AI’, use cases were few and far between. “For each of the use cases of AI that we identified across the supply chain, there’s a case study,” she says. “But finding those examples was really tough. What we do see is [companies] doing it piecemeal, so a team or even a country really invests in it, but that doesn’t give you the global visibility.”
Staying connected
The biggest companies in this market were established long before the idea of visibility, let alone end-to-end visibility, in the supply chain. For a business the size of Pfizer, GSK or AstraZeneca, for instance, there’s far more risk to the bottom line from making the necessary investment for a full digital transformation. On the other hand, a company started within the past few decades, like Moderna Therapeutics – identified as one of the few case studies in Deloitte’s report – is able to scale their technological capabilities alongside their growth. “They’re not like some of the pharma companies that have been around since the 1700s or 1800s and have a huge infrastructure to change,” says Taylor. That’s not to say that the benefits of an intelligent supply chain are out of reach for the larger companies. They just have to ensure they get the full picture and not just pieces of it, explains Emily May, life sciences insight lead, Centre for Health Solutions, Deloitte. “If you do it part by part, it’s important to make sure that as you scale it, those parts are interconnected and not in silos,” she says. Without that interconnectivity, she adds, “you won’t get the visibility benefits you would by doing it at scale.”
The cost mounts up when you take an intelligent supply chain apart to reveal its components, but companies aren’t typically building the capabilities in-house. Instead, they tend to partner with the likes of Amazon AWS, Microsoft and IBM for the necessary digital tools. Of course, availing of these services carries a cost too, but Taylor says it’s come down significantly over the years, likening it to the cost of sequencing DNA. “15 to 20 years ago it was over £1m for every piece of DNA you were trying to sequence,” she says. “Now, you can sequence whole genomes for under £1,000 and some even claim
World Pharmaceutical Frontiers /
www.worldpharmaceuticals.net
under £100. That scale of cost savings is reflected in the capacity of the technologies we’ve been talking about.” But despite there being a lower barrier of entry to adding intelligence and visibility to the supply chain in pharma now than say, ten years ago, the choice to implement it still has to be justified at the board level, meaning it must be cost-effective. For Taylor, the answer comes down to the following: “How important is having data every second instead of data every minute?” Drug companies will always prioritise the work that goes into discovering drugs that improve patient outcomes, especially in life-threatening diseases, and this will be reflected in their spending. “If you make a super-duper digitally-enabled, state of the art company, but you haven’t got any drugs to push through it, you’ve wasted a lot of money,” Taylor adds. Of course, this is an extreme scenario, but it outlines the types of cost-benefit analyses undertaken by pharma companies and helps us understand why the industry as a whole isn’t rushing to become fully digital.
“Now, you can sequence whole genomes for under £1,000 and some even claim under £100. That scale of cost savings is reflected in the capacity of the technologies we’ve been talking about.”
Karen Taylor, research director at Deloitte Where is the value?
For small molecule drugs without strict temperature requirements, how much value is there in having data every second as opposed to every minute, or even every hour? The answer to this will vary from organisation to organisation, but it’s unlikely that heavy investments are being made for low-risk products. On the other hand, for biologics like cell and gene therapies (CGT), where the supply chain is much shorter and a temperature excursion can render a product useless or even dangerous for the end user, data every second becomes a necessity. “Your patients aren’t all going to be sitting in one hospital, there might be 100 of them in 100 different places,” says Taylor. “Then there’s the time between manufacturing the drug and getting it to the patient.” The supply chain for CGT products looks very different to that of small molecule drugs, which extends the level of visibility required, encompassing manufacturing as well as logistics. “You’ve got patients sending their blood one way,” says Taylor, with the genetic engineering required to create a CAR T therapy in between, and “then being sent back”. “If you’re going into that space, you’re probably building a supply chain that is already very digitally-enabled,” she adds.
29
Fishman64/
www.shutterstock.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49
