The 50-Year Technology Drought in Clinical Trials: How AI Teammates Will Finally Bring Us Into the Modern Era

Gaurav Bhatnagar, Chief Growth Officer, Tilda Research

In an era where artificial intelligence (AI) writes poetry, self-driving cars navigate complex city streets, and algorithms predict consumer behavior with uncanny accuracy, one might assume that the critical business of testing life-saving medications would leverage cutting-edge technology. One would be wrong. The uncomfortable truth is that clinical trials—the very foundation of medical advancement—remain stuck in technological quicksand, with operational processes that would look remarkably familiar to a researcher from the 1970s.

Welcome to the Past: Clinical Trials' Time Capsule

While smartphones have evolved from brick-sized curiosities to pocket supercomputers, clinical trial operations have made only the most incremental advances. Let's examine what passes for "innovation" in this space:

Paper to EDC (electronic data capture). Yes, we've graduated from paper records to digital forms. This shift, celebrated as revolutionary, merely replaced physical filing cabinets with digital ones. The fundamental processes remain unchanged—manually entering data, manually checking data, manually querying discrepancies. We've simply traded pencils for keyboards while maintaining the same error-prone, labor-intensive methodology.¹

CTMS (clinical trial management systems). These systems store operational data in centralized databases—technology that banks and retailers mastered in the 1980s. While valuable for tracking basic metrics, CTMS solutions remain glorified spreadsheets that require extensive human management and offer limited automation or intelligence.²

eTMF (electronic trial master file). Moving regulatory documents to the cloud represents the bare minimum of digital transformation. We've exchanged physical storage rooms for digital repositories, but the processes surrounding document creation, review, and submission remain largely manual, fragmented, and inefficient.³

These "advancements" represent the lowest bar of technological adoption—digitization without transformation. It's akin to replacing a typewriter with a word processor but still printing and faxing all correspondence. The rest of the business world would find our celebration of these basic tools quaint at best and alarming at worst.

The Real-World Consequences of Technological Stagnation

This technological inertia isn't merely an academic concern. It manifests in stark, measurable ways:

Staggering costs. The average cost to bring a drug to market has ballooned to approximately $2.6 billion, with clinical trials representing roughly 70% of that expense. These costs ultimately translate to higher medication prices for patients.⁴

Extended timelines. The average clinical trial takes seven to 10 years from inception to completion. For patients with life-threatening conditions, these delays aren't inconveniences—they're potential death sentences.⁵

Overwhelming complexity. The average Phase III clinical trial collects more than three million data points across hundreds of sites and thousands of patients. Managing this complexity manually leads to errors, delays, and increased regulatory risk.⁶

Staff burnout. Clinical research associates and coordinators spend up to 70% of their time on administrative tasks rather than focusing on patient care and scientific oversight. The resulting burnout contributes to high turnover rates, further destabilizing trial operations.⁷

While other industries have leveraged technology to drive exponential improvements in efficiency and quality, clinical trials have experienced the opposite: increasing costs, extending timelines, and mounting complexity. We've been running uphill in concrete shoes while the rest of the business world sprints ahead in performance footwear.

The Illusion of Innovation

The industry isn't blind to these challenges. Conferences feature endless panels about "digital transformation," vendors hawk "innovative solutions," and leadership teams formulate ambitious technology roadmaps. Yet these efforts largely amount to incremental improvements within the existing paradigm—faster horses, not automobiles.

Most "innovations" in clinical trials fall into three categories:

Point solutions. Narrowly focused tools that address single pain points without integrating into the broader ecosystem. The result? Technology silos that create as many problems as they solve.⁸

Process digitization. Converting analog processes to digital without fundamentally reimagining the underlying workflows. This approach digitizes inefficiency rather than eliminating it.⁹

Data visualization. Creating dashboards and reports that highlight problems without actually solving them. Knowing your house is on fire more quickly doesn't extinguish the flames.

What's missing is a fundamental reimagining of how clinical trials operate—a shift from document-centric to data-centric approaches, from manual to automated workflows, and from reactive to proactive management. In short, we need a paradigm shift, not just better tools for the existing paradigm.¹⁰

The AI Teammate Revolution: A Vision for Modern Clinical Trials

Enter AI teammates for clinical trials—an approach that doesn't just incrementally improve the status quo but aims to fundamentally transform it. Unlike traditional automation that requires predefined pathways, AI teammates can handle the high complexity, multi-functional operations that characterize clinical trials through an agentic approach.

What Makes AI Teammates Revolutionary for Clinical Trials?

Contextual intelligence. Unlike rigid software systems that follow predefined rules, AI teammates understand context. They can interpret regulatory documents, recognize patterns in operational data, and make informed decisions based on a holistic understanding of the trial.¹¹

Adaptive learning. AI teammates improve over time, learning from interactions, identifying recurring issues, and refining their approaches. This creates a virtuous cycle of continuous improvement rather than the fixed functionality of traditional systems.¹²

Cross-functional coordination. Clinical trials involve numerous stakeholders—sponsors, contract research organizations, sites, regulators, vendors, and patients. AI teammates can bridge these functional silos, ensuring consistent communication and coordinated action across the entire ecosystem.¹³

Predictive intelligence. Rather than simply reporting what has happened, AI teammates can anticipate what will happen—identifying potential bottlenecks before they occur, predicting enrollment challenges, and enabling proactive rather than reactive trial management.¹⁴

Human augmentation. AI teammates don't replace human expertise; they amplify it. By handling routine tasks, analyzing complex datasets, and surfacing actionable insights, they free human teams to focus on activities that truly require human judgment and creativity.¹⁵

The potential impact is transformative:

Time reduction. AI teammates can compress trial timelines by 30%-50% through parallel processing, predictive workflow management, and elimination of administrative bottlenecks.¹⁶

Cost efficiency. By streamlining operations, reducing manual effort, and preventing costly errors, AI teammates can reduce operational costs by 40%-60%.¹⁷

Quality improvement. Through consistent execution, continuous monitoring, and early detection of potential issues, AI teammates can significantly enhance data quality and regulatory compliance.¹⁸

Real-World Examples of AI Teammates Impacting in Clinical Trials

AI teammates impacting are not just theoretical, they are already impacting clinical trials. At ICON Eyecare in Boulder, CO, for example, Dr. James Fox’s site is managing 37 patients in a pivotal intraocular lens trial—plus more than 100 other patients across multiple other studies—with just two clinical research coordinators. How? AI-powered teammates are handling the heavy administrative lift, streamlining compliance, and enabling true multitasking. The site now ranks second in enrollment, with 66% fewer queries and 90% faster query response times.

“It’s like hiring 1.5 more [full-time equivalents],” says Fox, MD—while also boosting staff satisfaction by cutting the repetitive tasks that bog teams down.

Meanwhile, Opus Genetics is using the power of AI to start multiple parallel trials in various rare retinal diseases—a feat previously out of reach for smaller biotechs. With AI structuring workflows and administrative operations, Opus can scale its pipeline with surprising speed and efficiency. This model unlocks entirely new possibilities for Opus, according to CEO George Magrath, MD.

The Era of Abundance in Clinical Research

The implications extend far beyond operational efficiency. By dramatically reducing the time and cost of clinical trials, Tilda's AI teammates can usher in an era of unprecedented abundance in medical research:

Democratized trial access. Lower costs mean that smaller biotechs and academic researchers can conduct trials that were previously feasible only for large pharmaceutical companies. This democratization will drive innovation and diversity in therapeutic development.¹⁹

Expanded investigator participation. The current system excludes countless qualified physicians and researchers from participating as clinical investigators due to the overwhelming administrative burden and complex operational requirements. AI teammates dramatically reduce these barriers, allowing a wider range of clinicians to participate in research without sacrificing their primary clinical responsibilities. Community physicians, rural healthcare providers, and specialists at smaller institutions can now contribute to medical advancement, bringing trials to previously underserved populations and expanding the investigator pool by orders of magnitude.²⁴

Enhanced patient recruitment and access. Today's trials struggle with recruitment largely because the process is cumbersome for both sites and patients. AI teammates streamline screening, consent, and enrollment workflows, making participation simpler and more accessible. By reducing administrative friction and providing intelligent matching of patients to appropriate trials, these systems can dramatically accelerate recruitment timelines while ensuring greater diversity in trial populations. Patients who would previously be excluded due to geographic or logistical barriers can now participate, democratizing access to cutting-edge treatments.²⁵

Expanded geographic reach. Simplified operations enable trials in regions previously deemed too operationally complex, ensuring greater diversity in trial populations and broader access to experimental treatments.²⁰

Accelerated medical innovation. Faster trials mean more rapid advancement of medical knowledge, allowing researchers to build upon successes and learn from failures at an accelerated pace.²¹

Patient-centered approaches. With AI teammates handling operational complexity, human teams can focus more on patient needs, experience, and outcomes—shifting from process-centric to truly patient-centric trials.²²

The clinical trial industry stands at an inflection point similar to other industries that have undergone technological revolution. Just as e-commerce transformed retail, digital platforms revolutionized entertainment, and fintech reinvented banking, AI teammates will fundamentally reshape how we develop and test new therapies.

The Choice Before Us

The status quo is not neutral; it actively harms patients by delaying access to potentially life-saving treatments. Every day spent in technological stagnation means another day patients wait for therapies that could improve or save their lives.²³

We have a choice: continue celebrating marginal improvements to 1970s-era processes or embrace a genuine technological revolution. AI teammates offer a path to the latter—a future where clinical trials operate with the speed, efficiency, and intelligence that patients deserve.

After four decades of technological drought in clinical trials, it's time for the floodgates of innovation to open. The patients are waiting.

Gaurav Bhatnagar is Chief Growth Officer at Tilda Research. He is a 25-year clinical trial veteran, working at major CROs and biopharma companies, pioneering innovations in risk-based monitoring, data-driven feasibility, patient recruitment, and digital/hybrid trial models.

References

1. Pavlović, I.; Kern, T.; Miklavčič, D. Comparison of paper-based and electronic data collection process in clinical trials: costs simulation study. Contemp Clin Trials. 2019;74:85-93.
2. Lamberti, M.J.; Hsia, R.; Mahon, C.; Milligan, C.; Getz, K. Assessing global clinical technology landscape. Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2020;54(6):1373-1382.
3. Zozus, M.N.; Lazarov, A.; Smith, L.R.; et al. Analysis of professional competencies for the clinical research data management profession: Implications for training and professional certification. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2022;24(4):737-745.
4. DiMasi, J.A.; Grabowski, H.G.; Hansen. R.W. Innovation in the pharmaceutical industry: New estimates of R&D costs. J Health Econ. 2016;47:20-33.
5. Sertkaya, A.; Wong, H.H.; Jessup, A.; Beleche, T. Key cost drivers of pharmaceutical clinical trials in the United States. Clin Trials. 2023;13(2):117-126.
6. Getz, K.; Campo, R.A. New benchmarks characterizing growth in protocol design complexity. Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2022;52(1):22-28.
7. Elias, T.; Boudes, M.; Tay, F.; Eng, C.T.; Jarvis, P. Clinical research associate workload survey results reveal role in crisis. Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2022;28:100926.
8. Harrer, S.; Shah, P.; Antony, B.; Hu, J. Artificial intelligence for clinical trial design. Trends Pharmacol Sci. 2019;40(8):577-591.
9. Sharma, N.S. Patient-centric approach for clinical trials: Current trend and new opportunities. Perspect Clin Res. 2022;6(3):134-138.
10. Hinkson, I.V.; Madej, B.; Stahlberg, E.A. Accelerating therapeutics for opportunities in medicine: A paradigm shift in drug discovery. Front Pharmacol. 2022;11:770.
11. Shah, P.; Kendall, F.; Khozin, S.; et al. Artificial intelligence and machine learning in clinical development: a translational perspective. NPJ Digit Med. 2019;2:69.
12. Lee, J.; Wu, Z.; Li, L.; et al. Artificial intelligence in drug development: The great promise in early-phase drug development. Clin Transl Sci. 2023;15(1):293-299.
13. Knepper, T.; McLeod, H. Next-generation clinical trials: Novel strategies to address the challenge of tumor molecular heterogeneity. Mol Oncol. 2022;12(10):1626-1629.
14. Banger, N.; Trujillo, A. Automated monitoring and risk-based approach to clinical trials: A viewpoint on the growing adoption of artificial intelligence in clinical research. Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2023;57(3):415-422.
15. Aroda, V.R.; Edelstein, S.L.; Goldberg, R.B.; et al. Facilitating clinical trials and precision medicine with human-in-the-loop AI systems. npj Digit Med. 2024;7:3.
16. Lamberti. M.J.; Wilkinson, M.; Harper, B.; Morgan, C.; Getz, K. Assessing study start-up practices, performance, and perceptions among sponsors and contract research organizations. Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2022;52(5):572-578.\
17. Moore, T.J.; Zhang, H.; Anderson, G.; Alexander, G.C. Estimated costs of pivotal trials for novel therapeutic agents approved by the US Food and Drug Administration, 2015-2016. JAMA Intern Med. 2022;178(11):1451-1457.
18. Rosenblum, D.; Alwan, F. The impact of data-driven monitoring on trial performance metrics. Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2022;55(4):863-868.
19. Djurisic, S.; Rath, A.; Gaber, S.; et al. Barriers to the conduct of randomized clinical trials within all disease areas. Trials. 2023;18(1):360.
20. Alemayehu, C.; Mitchell, G.; Nikles, J. Barriers for conducting clinical trials in developing countries- a systematic review. Int J Equity Health. 2022;17(1):37.
21. Breckenridge, A.; Feldschreiber, P.; Gregor, S.; Raine, J.; Mulcahy, L.A. Evolution of regulatory frameworks: Responding to new technology challenges. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2022;18(6):430-431.
22. Sharma ,N.S. Patient-centric approach for clinical trials: Current trend and new opportunities. Perspect Clin Res. 2023;6(3):134-138.
23. Nabhan, C.; Feinberg, B.A. Access to innovative therapies in the era of precision medicine. JAMA Oncol. 2022;4(1):17-18.
24. Rahman, S.; Majumder, M.A.A.; Shaban, S.F.; et al. Physician participation in clinical research and trials: issues and approaches. Adv Med Educ Pract. 2023;2:85-93.
25. Unger, J.M.; Cook, E.; Tai, E.; Bleyer, A. The role of clinical trial participation in cancer research: barriers, evidence, and strategies. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book. 2023;35:185-198.