Register Now - Beyond Recruitment: The Future of Patient Site Engagement in Oncology Clinical Trials
Commentary|Articles|September 13, 2024

Applied Clinical Trials

  • Applied Clinical Trials-09-01-2024
  • Volume 33
  • Issue 9

Aligning Technology and Oversight

Amid the steady introduction of new tech and data advances in study conduct, the September issue of Applied Clinical Trials explores the evolving regulatory landscape governing these efforts and what companies are doing to remain compliant.

Throughout 2024, we have witnessed a multitude of advancements in the clinical research industry—many of them in technology. In a space that is so closely regulated, it is remarkable that sponsors and their service-provider partners are continuing to find new and innovative ways to bring therapies to patients faster. In this September issue of Applied Clinical Trials, we dive into the evolving regulatory landscape governing the life sciences and what some of these companies are doing to remain compliant.

Our quartet of feature articles begins with a look at the biologics setting, specifically how strategic, regulatory-focused chemistry, manufacturing, and controls (CMC) approaches can help advance their development. For biological products in particular, such as cell and gene therapies, a strong emphasis on risk assessment, departmental collaboration, and communication with regulatory authorities are all key in remaining compliant throughout all stages of development. Following is a piece on navigating diverse clinical trial patient payment and data requirements. With differing global standards and crossover into other elements such as data privacy and finance, it is crucial to remain compliant.

Our next feature brings us into the world of artificial intelligence (AI) and digital twins. The use of digital twins in clinical trials has been a gray area for regulators in past years. However, both the FDA and European Medicines Agency have expressed a willingness to explore the area further. Now that the two agencies have created "action plans" of sorts in the formal incorporation of AI, now is the time to begin moving forward with models such as digital twins. Rounding out this month’s features is an overview of the FDA’s recent actions in advocating for clinical trial diversity—in the form of various guidance documents. While the promise and benefits from new technology is exciting, it means very little if clinical trials are failing to adequately represent diverse populations. New guidances from the FDA have put strict oversight on sponsors that will hopefully create more movement in continuing to diversify trials.

As evidenced by our coverage, the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving. For the latest insights and news in this space, stay tuned to our website. As always, thank you for reading.

Mike Hennessy Jr is president and CEO of MJH Life Sciences®


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.
Building AI Assistants Clinical Trial Teams Can Trust: Q&A with E.K. Koh, Suvoda
In this Q&A, E.K. Koh, chief product officer at Suvoda, discusses what separates a trustworthy AI assistant from one that adds risk, why curated clinical knowledge matters more than general-purpose flexibility, and what safeguards must be in place when assistants move from answering questions to taking actions in clinical trial systems.