Regulatory

In this Q&A, Elizabeth Walsh, PMP, ACRP-CP, founder of Walsh Clinical Advisory and co-author of The Clinical Execution Blueprint, discusses the persistent misconceptions about sponsor accountability, why execution gaps originate long before study startup, and what genuine inspection readiness looks like when it is built in from the outset.

In this video interview, Stella K. Vnook, PhD, CEO of Kaida BioPharma and founder of Aviva Ventures, explains how declining NIH funding, late-stage pharma acquisition strategies, and global operating pressures are forcing sponsors to move faster and more capital-efficiently toward clinical inflection points.

Real-world oncology data requires hybrid curation combining clinical expertise with technology to address variability in documentation, missing data, and complex concepts like lines of therapy that are often implicit rather than explicitly recorded in EHRs.

Consumer-grade wearables offer promise for reducing trial burden and improving engagement, but accuracy and reliability vary substantially by device, measurement, and population, requiring rigorous fit-for-purpose validation and careful endpoint selection before integration into regulated research.

As agentic AI, automated data harmonization, and real-time monitoring reshape clinical development, the organizations seeing meaningful results are those that have invested in unified data infrastructure and disciplined governance rather than cycling through pilots without the foundation to scale them.

In this video interview, Raviv Pryluk, CEO and co-founder of PhaseV, makes the case that scaling real-time data review requires an ecosystem approach—bringing regulators, sponsors, CROs, and technology vendors together in a shared learning environment rather than letting progress remain siloed.

New documents targeting performance status, washout periods, and laboratory value thresholds aim to close the gap between patients willing to participate in oncology trials and those who actually enroll.

In this video interview, Raviv Pryluk, CEO and co-founder of PhaseV, explains why the FDA's real-time clinical trial pilot was promising but not yet scale ready—and what technology infrastructure needs to be in place for the model to work broadly.

Clinical development operates as an integrated system where dependencies persist across phases and vendors, but treating contracts as execution handoffs creates invisible oversight gaps that surface later as vendor performance problems, timeline slips, or inspection findings.

In this video interview, Elizabeth Walsh, founder of Walsh Clinical Advisory and co-author of The Clinical Execution Blueprint, describes what it means to accumulate inspection readiness rather than assemble it—and why the story regulators reconstruct is determined long before an inspection is announced.

The European Health Data Space reshapes CRO operations by transitioning them from data custodians to regulated users accessing data within secure, auditable environments, enabling cross-border research but requiring substantial investment in compliance, standardization, and methodological rigor.

In this Q&A, Gaynor Anders, chief delivery officer at Trialbee, discusses how the FDA's single pivotal trial shift is raising the stakes on patient recruitment, why the study-by-study model has persisted for so long, and what program-level recruitment actually requires from sponsors in terms of infrastructure, data sharing, and organizational change.

Clinical R&D modernization stalls through incremental optimization of individual workflows, but meaningful systemic change requires leaders to visualize structural relationships, understand hidden incentives, and identify leverage points that benefit the whole system rather than parts.

As the FDA's single-trial standard raises the cost of recruitment failure and diversity expectations intensify, sponsors are under pressure to move beyond study-by-study outreach toward programmatic, relationship-based approaches that treat patient engagement as a long-term strategic capability rather than a per-study operational task.

The traditional global-to-local communication model creates fragmented content through sequential adaptation, but a local-first approach using structured data and AI-orchestrated generation can embed stakeholder terminology and preferences from the start, reducing rework while improving clarity and relevance.

In this Q&A, Rob DiCicco, vice president of portfolio management at TransCelerate Biopharma, discusses the collaborative work underway with FDA and CTTI to explore selective safety data collection as a model for de-risking trial design, reducing site and patient burden, and scaling pragmatic trial approaches across the industry.

The FDA's launch of real-time clinical trial proof-of-concept studies signals a fundamental shift in regulatory oversight, one that most sponsors are not yet equipped to meet and that demands urgent investment in unified data infrastructure, quality-by-design practices, and protocol digitization.

Clinical data security built into system architecture from the foundation, rather than layered on afterward, reduces regulatory risk and actually accelerates research by removing manual compliance burden and improving team confidence in data integrity.

In this Q&A, Raj Indupuri, CEO and co-founder of eClinical Solutions, discusses what the FDA's push toward continuous data review actually demands of sponsors operationally, why fragmented systems are the core obstacle, and how AI and real-world evidence fit into a more data-driven regulatory environment.

From real-time evidence generation to federated AI to site-level data integration, ACT spoke with seven experts at DIA 2026 on the trends and challenges defining clinical trial operations today.

A coordinated department-wide initiative combines FDA regulatory reforms, NIH investments, and new agency programs to reduce development timelines and reverse a growing shift of clinical research overseas.

How sponsors can leverage both the EU Clinical Trials Regulation and UK’s reformed framework to achieve cost efficiencies, faster timelines, and stronger regulatory positioning.

A Tufts CSDD study quantifies risk-based quality management's net financial value at $13.8 million per Phase III oncology trial, with ROI multiples up to 22.7x driven primarily by cycle time reductions rather than monitoring cost savings.