Towards improved process efficiency in vaccine innovation: The Vaccine Innovation Cycle as a validated, conceptual stage-gate model

[Display omitted] •The full vaccine innovation cycle is described by 29 distinct stages and 28 corresponding gates.•A cyclical innovation model highlights the importance of synchronizing with unmet needs.•Internal criteria for continued development are broader than external criteria.•An overarching...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Vaccine 2018-11, Vol.36 (49), p.7496-7508
Main Authors: Van de Burgwal, L.H.M., Ribeiro, C. Dos S., Van der Waal, M.B., Claassen, E.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Collaboration
Conceptual model
Efficiency
Immunization
Innovation
Innovations
Vaccine
Vaccines
Valorization
Value
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:[Display omitted] •The full vaccine innovation cycle is described by 29 distinct stages and 28 corresponding gates.•A cyclical innovation model highlights the importance of synchronizing with unmet needs.•Internal criteria for continued development are broader than external criteria.•An overarching conceptual model for vaccine innovation may reduce innovation inefficiencies. Continuing investments in vaccine innovation are insufficiently translated into market entries of novel vaccines. This innovation paradox is in part caused by stakeholders lacking complete understanding of the complex array of steps necessary for vaccine development and collaboration difficulties between the wide variety of stakeholders involved. Models providing cross-domain understanding can improve collaboration but currently lack both comprehensibility and granularity to enable a prioritized view of activities and criteria. Key opinion leaders (KOLs) were asked to contribute to the definition of a vaccine innovation cycle (VIC). In a first step, 18 KOLs were interviewed on the stages (activities and results) and gates (evaluation criteria and outcomes) of vaccine innovation. This first description of the VIC was subsequently validated and refined through a survey among 46 additional KOLs. The VIC identifies 29 distinct stages and 28 corresponding gates, distributed in ten different but integrated workstreams, and comprehensibly depicted in a circular innovation model. Some stage-gates occur at defined moments, whereas the occurrence and timing of other stage-gates is contingent on a variety of contextual factors. Yet other stage-gates continuously monitor internal and external developments. A gap-overlap analysis of stage-gate criteria demonstrated that 5 out of 11 criteria employed by vaccine developers correspond with criteria employed by competent (regulatory) authorities. The VIC provides a comprehensive overview of stage-gates throughout the value chain of vaccine innovation. Its cyclical nature highlights the importance of synchronizing with unmet needs and market changes, and conceptualizes the difference between incremental and radical vaccine innovation. Knowledge on the gap between internal and external criteria will enhance the viability of newcomers to the field. The VIC can be used by stakeholders to improve understanding and communication in forming collaborative alliances and consortia. Such a boundary-spanning function may contribute to the reduction of process inef
ISSN:0264-410X
1873-2518
DOI:10.1016/j.vaccine.2018.10.061