Feature|Articles|October 15, 2026

Endpoints That Reflect What Patients Actually Value: Who Decides What Counts as Trial Success

Clinical trial endpoints define what success looks like, but patients and caregivers are rarely the ones setting that definition, and the gap between what trials measure and what patients actually value is showing up in post-approval evidence, regulatory submissions, and the design rooms where protocols are written.

The question of which outcomes a clinical trial should measure has grown more complicated as therapies have become more targeted, patient populations more specific, and regulators more attentive to patient-focused drug development. Endpoint selection has historically been driven by expert clinical teams, regulatory precedent, and analytical convention, but each of those inputs has a blind spot. Together they are being challenged.

Related to this article

© putilov_denis - © putilov_denis - stock.adobe.com
Real-time clinical trials require standardized digital data capture at the point of care through scaled eSource-EDC-EHR integration, but progress stalls because competing standards lack regulatory enforcement and one-off system integrations cannot scale beyond single studies without industry-wide alignment and legal clarity on data ownership.
Where AI Leads in Trial Design—and Where Humans Still Need To
In this video interview, Claire Riches, VP of clinical solutions at Citeline, makes the case for AI as a sophisticated strategic advisor in trial design while arguing that humans must remain in the lead—especially when factors the model can't fully account for are at stake.