Drug Development


Breaking down silos


in drug development why interdisciplinary integration is fundamental for pharma’s future


A silo mentality is an issue for any organisation, but it is particularly problematic for the pharmaceutical industry. Drug development is a multidisciplinary endeavour that relies on the cumulative efforts of highly skilled teams in order to be successful. Yet these teams cannot work in isolation. Few development challenges reside within their own ‘bubble’; without careful planning and good communication, the solutions adopted to overcome one obstacle can have a significant knock-on effect elsewhere in the development pipeline. As a result, fragmented thinking can lead to poor decision-making, costly hold-ups, and even contribute to the failure of entire programmes. In this article, we consider the symptoms and consequences of a silo culture in drug development, and look at how interdisciplinary integration should be at the heart of every pharma business model.


W


ith the pharmaceutical industry under continued pressure from tightening international healthcare budgets and increased regulatory complexity due to a wealth of new technologies, drug developers are looking for faster and more resource-efficient ways to bring safe and effective medicines to market. Increasingly, pharmaceutical companies are not only recognising the benefits of taking a joined-up approach within their own organisation, but with the contract research organisations (CROs) they work with too. So, how can interdisciplinary inte- gration in drug development expedite drug devel-


Drug Discovery World Winter 2017/18


opment programmes and turn molecules into medicines as cost-effectively as possible?


Challenges for the industry


Following modest but steady growth in the number of drug approvals over the past decade, the number of new medicines granted market approval fell sig- nificantly in 2016, with just 22 new molecular enti- ties approved by the FDA – fewer than half of 2015’s figure1. Many have been quick to explain away this dip, pointing to advanced or delayed approvals, technology glitches and updates to cur- rent Good Manufacturing Practices standards


49 By Dr Paul Overton


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  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72