When using overseas CROs or disease models, the company's location alone does not allow you to determine the actual study execution country, contract terms, language, international transport, or regulatory compliance. Furthermore, the mere information that they "possess the model" does not tell you whether that model can be utilized for standard contract research.
Here, practical conditions regarding international outsourcing and each company's model provision formats are organized by item. Please use this as a reference checklist when comparing candidate outsourcing destinations.
Things to check before looking at the comparison table
The head office location and the test implementation country are different.
We will confirm the locations of the sales offices or Japanese legal entities separately from the locations of the facilities where the non-clinical studies are actually conducted.
The Japanese-language support desk and the availability of domestic contracts are separate items.
I will check separately whether we can consult in Japanese and whether the Japanese legal entity can be the contracting party.
Owning a model and conducting regular testing are different things.
Distinguish between proprietary models, routine implementation, past performance, partnership models, and custom builds.
Not listed does not mean unsupported
Items that cannot be confirmed through publicly available information alone are marked as "pending confirmation" and are not judged as unsupported.
Comparing Practical Conditions Required for International Outsourcing
When outsourcing to an overseas CRO, it is necessary to separately confirm the actual countries where the trials will be conducted, the Japanese-speaking point of contact, the contracting entity, the language of the reports, international shipping, and the scope of compliance with the regulations of each country.
You can scroll horizontally to view the table.
The "actual test execution countries" are organized by prioritizing the location of facilities where non-clinical, pharmacology, toxicology, DMPK, etc., are conducted, rather than the business offices.
Comparison of Disease Model Delivery Formats
The use of disease models is not limited to cases where each company uses its own uniquely developed model. Other approaches include conducting studies as standard contract menus, using partner-affiliated models, and newly building models for each project.
proprietary model
This model is developed, branded, and copyrighted in-house.
regularly implemented at our own facilities
This is a model that includes standard procedures and can be undertaken as a routine project.
Past implementation experience
While there is a past track record, it is not necessarily offered on a regular basis currently.
Via license and partners
We will use external models, licenses, and partner technologies.
Custom-built for each project
We newly construct or optimize models depending on the target and pathological conditions.
You can scroll horizontally to view the table.
Yes relatively clearPublic information available There is a difference in the granularity of information.Please confirm Do not make definitive conclusions based solely on publicly available information.
Regarding the published information
This page organizes comparison items based on publicly available information. Items marked as "Needs Confirmation" or left unlisted do not imply that a company does not support them. Test details, implementing facilities, contract terms, languages, transportation, regulatory compliance, and model availability are subject to change. Please check official information or contact points of each company for specific outsourcing terms.
Japanese
