Register Now - Beyond Recruitment: The Future of Patient Site Engagement in Oncology Clinical Trials
|Articles|November 10, 2014

Everything You Need to Know About Imaging Analytics For Clinical Trials

The image acquisition and analysis components of R&D and clinical trials can be quite complex...

Editor’s Note: This article is part of a series examining popular peer-reviewed articles from years past called “Peer-Reviews Revisited: Why You Should Read Today.” You can read the other articles in this series here.


The image acquisition and analysis components of R&D and clinical trials can be quite complex, so complex that it can leave even the savviest sponsors and CROs facing the I-don’t-even-know-where–to-begin dilemma. 

And yet, a critical part of the trial protocol is the "power" variable, or the number of patients required to reach 90% to 95% confidence such that statistical significance can be reliably concluded at the end of a trial. Inevitably, in order to reach such significance in a highly variable human population the recommended number of patients in these studies can be quite large. Unfortunately, with large patients cohorts, the effort, time, and cost required to analyze and score all of the medical image data acquired during the trial can increase exponentially and pose a significant barrier in getting a new medical device or therapeutic to market. Harnessing the power of imaging analytics and incorporating them into a clinical study is not a simple task, but the benefits gained can make it a worthwhile investment.

The good news is rapid advances in image acquisition technology and continued developments in image analysis software are changing the depth and breadth of clinical research. Imaging permeates clinical and basic research across many scientific disciplines including oncology, orthopedics, ophthalmology, cardiology, and neurology, and across entities focusing on pharmaceuticals, medical device development, cell and molecular biology, tissue engineering and beyond.

The challenge for the investigator then is to stay current on the state-of-the-art in imaging and image analysis, let alone the imaging-related requirements for preclinical and clinical trials. He or she must also know how to figure in availability and, of course, cost along with other factors particular to the trial.

In this peer-reviewed article “Art & Science of Imaging Analytics” that appeared in Applied Clinical Trials in March 2013, authors Amit Vasanji and Brett A. Hoover tell you everything you need to know about the state of Imaging and guide you through the acquisition process.

Once integrated, these new approaches to imaging and analysis provide a number of other benefits as well:

  • Increased precision, throughput and objectivity of outcome metrics with automation of traditionally manual image scoring processes

  • Reduced likelihood of unexpected delays due to personnel turnover and expertise unavailability

  • Reduced cost and guesswork associated with clinical trials with more comprehensive and quantitative data and potentially smaller patient cohorts

  • Improved ability to communicate and leverage study results through quantitative data renderings and visualizations (2D or 3D)—collateral for market adoption

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.