Register Now - Beyond Recruitment: The Future of Patient Site Engagement in Oncology Clinical Trials
|Articles|April 1, 2015

Applied Clinical Trials

  • Applied Clinical Trials-04-01-2015
  • Volume 35
  • Issue 3

Adaptive Trial Designs Gaining Momentum

Author(s)ISR

Faster go/no-go decisions is the primary driver of adaptive-design adoption by sponsors.

 

In ISR's 2015 Adaptive Trials: Market Dynamics and Service Provider Benchmarking report, a key takeaway reached is that the primary driver of adoption of adaptive designs is the ability to reach critical decision points earlier. This does not necessarily mean that trial timelines are shorter or costs are lower, but instead that the probable outcomes of these trials are determined earlier so resources can be more effectively allocated to more promising or profitable drugs or devices. ISR found this as a chief motivator for the continued growth of adaptive trial designs. While only 49% of respondents report that they are currently conducting a trial with an adaptive design, 82% anticipate they will be over the next 12 months.


Faster Go/No-Go Decisions the Top Driver

When ISR asked respondents what their main reasons were for conducting trials with adaptive designs, 63% said to make earlier go/no-go decisions.

The primary hesitation associated with using adaptive trial designs relates to the regulatory environment surrounding adaptive trials. Upwards of 60% of ISR's survey respondents perceived adaptive trials as at least "somewhat risky."

- Industry Standard Research (ISR)

 


Related to this article

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.