Depending on the motivations & SOP of the company; yes and no. Obviously all companies should strive to keep as much of their testing & research in house as its the "home turf". A company needs to decide what works best for them. I have no personal experience with selecting a CRO, or even deciding to choose a CRO; it seems that there are a few options to consider. CROs are dedicated to a single task, meaning they (hopefully) are efficient and have the resources to complete all the research in a timely manner. This expertise comes with costs & risks; outsourcing can lead to timeline disruptions and adds variables that may not be desirable.
Hello,
The decision to run a clinical trial in-house or outsource it to a Clinical Research Organization (CRO) should be based on a careful consideration of several factors. One factor to consider is the company's internal capabilities. Does the company have the necessary expertise, resources, and infrastructure to conduct the trial successfully? If the company lacks the required skills or experience, outsourcing to a CRO may be the best option. Another factor to consider is the complexity of the trial. Some trials may be more complex than others, requiring specialized knowledge and resources. If the trial is particularly complex, it may be more efficient to outsource to a CRO that has the required expertise and resources. The availability of resources is also an important factor to consider. Conducting a clinical trial can be a resource-intensive process, requiring significant time, money, and personnel. If the company does not have the necessary resources, outsourcing to a CRO may be a more cost-effective option. The company's goals and objectives should also be taken into consideration. If the goal is to get the product to market quickly, outsourcing to a CRO may be the best option as they can often conduct trials more efficiently than an in-house team. On the other hand, if the company's goal is to maintain control over the trial process, conducting the trial in-house may be the better option.
Outsourcing vs insourcing for clinical trials should be based on the company's internal capabilities to perform a clinical trial. If the company itself have the time and resources to perform a clinical trials then by all means this should be the ideal option. This way the company can have full control on how they want to run the trial, what they need to do the trial, as well as selecting people to perform the trial. If the company can use their own resources to conduct a trial/study they should and its the more optimal choice in terms of having control. However in some cases resources may need to be expanded and outsourced due to current state not being compatible in running a clinical trial. This is when a CRO needs to be used. When outsourcing to a CRO considerations that needs to be taken into account is if the specific CRO is reliable, have a good reputation, and have necessary resources. Benefits to outsourceing is that these CRO tend to be more equipped in handling experiments that are complex and that may be out of scope in what the current company can handle. Regardless of in or outsourcing considerations are needed to be accounted for both sides