Register Now - Beyond Recruitment: The Future of Patient Site Engagement in Oncology Clinical Trials
Commentary|Videos|June 19, 2026

2026 DIA Global Annual Meeting: Stacy Hurt of Parexel on Federated AI, the Patient Voice, and Accountability for Patient Needs

In this video interview from the 2026 DIA Global Annual Meeting, Stacy Hurt, chief patient officer at Parexel, explains how federated AI is expanding what's possible in oncology research, why the patient voice gets lost earliest in development, and why someone in every organization needs to explicitly own patient needs from the very beginning.

Full interview summary

In a recent video interview with Applied Clinical Trials at the 2026 DIA Global Annual Meeting, Stacy Hurt, chief patient officer at Parexel, discussed how federated AI, early patient engagement, and organizational accountability are reshaping what it means to truly center patients in clinical development. She opened by drawing a compelling parallel between meeting patients where they are and meeting data where it is—arguing that federated AI's ability to aggregate information across institutions and community sites without centralizing it makes it a particularly powerful tool for oncology research. Because data stays with the patient and institutions that own it, she noted, privacy is preserved while diversity of representation is expanded.

On the patient voice, Hurt was direct: it gets lost most often at the very beginning of clinical development—which is precisely where it needs to be present. She described hearing consistently from patients that trial design too often requires them to upend their lives to participate, rather than being built around the realities of their lives from the start. Defining endpoints that are meaningful to patients, involving advocacy groups and people with lived experience at the inception of study design, and not waiting until a protocol is finalized—these are the interventions that make a real difference.

She closed with a pointed takeaway from her sessions: no one should assume someone else is looking after patient needs across clinical operations, data, or pharmacovigilance. That accountability has to be explicitly owned. She expressed pride in Parexel's decision to establish a chief patient officer role as a strategic function, describing it as a mechanism for pulling patient input through every stage of development—not as an afterthought, but as a core driver of how work gets done.


Related to this article

What Expanding AI Ecosystems Mean for Sponsor Complexity and Oversight
In this video interview, Rajneesh Patil, global head of AI, digital, and innovation in clinical development at Syneos Health, argues that CROs must act as orchestrators rather than aggregators—and that the real test of any AI ecosystem is whether it reduces sponsor coordination burden or just hands it back to them.
Closing the Community Access Gap: Q&A with Kent Thoelke, Paradigm Health
In this Q&A, Kent Thoelke, CEO of Paradigm Health, discusses why participation gaps in community and rural settings come down to both patient cost barriers and site infrastructure, how legacy workflows weigh on community clinics, and what policy and technology changes it would take to make clinical research a real care option for more patients.
© Grispb - © Grispb - stock.adobe.com
Mistral and OpenAI produced identical overall eligibility labels across 200 synthetic patient-study assessments, with criterion-level disagreements concentrated in inclusion criteria where models switch between “Uncertain” and “Not included” when records lack sufficient evidence, so model choice should be driven by deployment architecture, control, and cost rather than assumed interchangeability.
The Human Side of Clinical Trials: Before Burden Becomes Risk, Capturing Friction in Real Time
In Episode 4 of The Human Side of Clinical Trials, host Brian S. McGowan, PhD, FACEHP, chief learning officer and co-founder of ArcheMedX, Inc., speaks with Jason Riis, PhD, CEO and chief behavioral scientist at Behavioralize, about how capturing friction closer to the moment it happens can reveal unclear instructions, technology friction, and workarounds that retrospective surveys and debriefs tend to miss.