
Feature|Articles|July 30, 2026
Artificial Intelligence in Clinical Trials: From Pilots to Practice
Author(s)Andy Studna, Senior Editor
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.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Artificial intelligence (AI) is moving from a source of experimentation in clinical development to a defining operational capability, but the gap between what AI promises and what organizations are able to deliver remains significant.
Related to this article

Most AI pilots in drug development fail not from poor technology but from lack of strategic prioritization, organizational readiness, integrated data infrastructure, and disciplined governance, making success dependent on business discipline rather than technical capability.

In rare disease drug development where no registry or natural history dataset exists, real-world evidence quality depends on treating evidence engineering as a design-stage decision, defining intended regulatory use and standardizing endpoints, harmonization, and data provenance upfront rather than reconciling gaps after collection.

Clinical trials have spent decades perfecting data capture, but the execution layer underneath it, including decision workflows, data collection design, and lab connectivity, remains fragmented in ways that limit what AI can realistically deliver and that quietly compromise the scientific validity of the data itself.

RWE is finding a role earlier in drug development than ever before, but the data quality, integration, and organizational alignment required to make it regulatory-grade are still catching up to the ambition.

Cell and gene therapy access expands into community care settings only when operational coordination, site readiness, and supply chain standardization become first-order priorities equivalent to manufacturing capacity, requiring standardized processes, digital integration, and distributed logistics networks.

Decentralized trial models have demonstrated real gains in enrollment performance and patient access, but operational switching costs, fragmented technology stacks, and unresolved gaps in the patient-site relationship raise a question the industry has been slow to confront directly.

Sponsor oversight of outsourced CRO work is often robust in practice but fails inspection because oversight decisions are fragmented across systems and lack an audit trail, requiring sponsors to document oversight as a connected operating system with clear decision records, escalation pathways, and issue resolution from start to finish.
Advertisement
Advertisement

