The high content screening market is expected to increase at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 10.3 percent from USD 557.1 million in 2017 to USD 909.0 million by 2022. The need for cost containment in pharma R&D, growth in funding for cellular research, and technological developments in HCS solutions are projected to drive the high content screening market over the forecast period. The high cost of HCS devices, on the other hand, and the scarcity of qualified and skilled personnel to operate high-content screening instruments are projected to limit market expansion to a considerable extent.
The HCS instruments market held the greatest proportion of the HCS market, owing to developments in instrumentation and automation techniques, as well as high HCS instrument pricing. During the forecast period, the software segment is expected to increase the most. The requirement to gather information on changes in cell morphology through high-quality images, as well as technological developments in image acquisition, data analysis, and storage capacities, are driving the expansion of this market.
Target identification and validation, primary and secondary screening, toxicity studies, compound profiling, and other applications such as angiogenesis, apoptosis, cell cycle and mitotic index, cell proliferation, endocytosis, protein synthesis, and stem cell differentiation are all segments of the high-content screening market. During the projection period, the primary and secondary screening application segment is predicted to increase at the fastest CAGR. The widespread use of HCS for secondary screening is mostly to blame for the rapid rise. The availability of a significant number of potent candidates can also be ascribed to growth in the primary and secondary screening segments.
High-content screening is most popular in North America, followed by Europe, Asia-Pacific, Latin America, and the Middle East and Africa. The considerable share of the market held by North America is due to high R&D spending, the existence of big pharmaceutical market companies, and increasing government backing. However, due to increased drug discovery research, government efforts, multinational businesses' expanding focus on emerging markets, and developing R&D infrastructure, the Asia-Pacific market is predicted to grow at the fastest rate throughout the forecast period.
According to the California Biomedical Research Association (CBRA), a medicine takes an average of 12 years to get from the lab to the patient, with toxicology studies alone taking 1–6 years. Furthermore, only five out of every 5,000 medications that begin preclinical testing (about 10%) make it to human testing. Only one of these five has been approved for human use. According to a report published in the Journal of Health Economics in March 2016 by the Tufts Center for the Study of Medicine Development (US), the average cost of developing and gaining marketing approval for a new drug was USD 2.56 billion. The high cost and long time it takes to produce a medicine are deterrents for pharmaceutical companies.
The traditional approach to toxicity testing entails sifting through enormous libraries in search of new therapeutic candidates. This procedure is costly, time- and resource-intensive, and has a low success rate. As a result, pharmaceutical companies are adopting HCS solutions for testing the potential toxicity of chemicals and complex substances in order to improve in vitro toxicity testing by lowering time and expense. This is propelling the high-content screening market forward, and it is projected to be a prominent driver over the forecast period.
HCS instruments are more expensive because they have advanced cell imaging and analysis features and functionality. A confocal microscope can set you back more than 200,000 dollars. The GE Healthcare InCell 2000 Analyzer system used in HCS costs roughly USD 240,000. A flow cytometer device can cost anywhere from $35,000 for simple cell analyzers to more than $300,000 for more complicated systems with higher throughput. The CyFlow Cube 6 from Sysmex-Partec, for example, costs roughly USD 35,000.
Bio-Rad Laboratories' S3 cell sorter costs roughly USD 150,000, whereas BD's FACSJazz costs around USD 240,000. Due to their limited finances, academic research laboratories are unable to purchase such tools. Pharmaceutical businesses, on the other hand, require a large number of such systems, which increases their capital expenditures dramatically. Furthermore, the overall cost of ownership of these instruments is increased by maintenance charges and a variety of additional indirect expenses. As a result of their high cost, HCS devices are not widely used in clinical and research settings, especially in developing countries.
Comments
Post a Comment