Depot Network Design: How Many Depots Does Your Trial Really Need?

Ask ten supply leaders how many depots a global Phase 3 trial needs and you will get ten answers. Some prefer a lean network with one central hub and direct shipments. Others put a depot in nearly every country. Both can work, and both can fail. The right network depends on where your sites are, how your product moves across borders, and how much you are willing to pay for speed.

Network design is one of the decisions that quietly sets your trial's cost and risk profile for years. It deserves more than a default answer from your distribution vendor.

What a depot is for

A depot does three jobs. It holds stock close to sites so resupply is fast. It handles importation, so stock clears customs once in bulk rather than shipment by shipment. And it can relabel, repackage, or apply country labels near the point of use. If a location does not need any of those three, it probably does not need a depot.

The case for fewer depots

Every depot holds safety stock. More depots mean more total inventory, more product stranded in the wrong place, more expiry, and more reconciliation at closeout. Each depot also adds setup cost, monthly fees, qualification, and oversight. A lean network with a central hub shipping direct to sites keeps inventory pooled and flexible.

Direct shipping works best when:

• Sites are in countries with easy import of investigational product.
• Transit times from the hub are short and reliable.
• The product is stable and easy to ship.
• The trial is small or regionally concentrated.

The case for more depots

Some countries make direct shipping painful. Import permits may be issued per shipment, customs may take days, or an importer of record may be required. In those countries, a local depot pays for itself by clearing bulk stock once and serving sites quickly. Long distances, cold chain products with tight transit windows, and fast-enrolling regions also argue for local stock.

A practical way to decide

Score each country on a few factors:

• Import complexity. Per-shipment permits, slow customs, importer requirements.
• Volume. Number of sites and expected patients.
• Transit risk. Distance and lane reliability from the nearest hub.
• Labeling needs. Whether local labeling or relabeling is needed.
• Enrollment speed. How fast sites will burn through stock.

Countries that score high on several factors usually justify a local depot. Countries that score low can usually be served from a regional hub. The middle group is where judgment and cost modeling come in.

Model the cost, both ways

For borderline countries, compare total cost. On one side are depot setup, monthly fees, extra safety stock, and expected expiry. On the other are per-shipment import costs, longer resupply times, higher site buffers, and the risk of delayed patient visits. The cheapest option is not always obvious until you write the numbers down.

Design for change

Trials rarely end with the country list they started with. Build a network that can absorb new countries. A regional hub with good relabeling capability lets you add countries without opening a new depot each time. Agree contract terms that let you open or close depots without punishing fees.

Plan the exit too. When a region finishes enrolling, close its depot on purpose. Move usable stock to where it is needed, reconcile, and destroy the rest. Depots that are left open long after their last shipment are a hidden cost in many trials.