Register Now - Beyond Recruitment: The Future of Patient Site Engagement in Oncology Clinical Trials
Commentary|Videos|September 25, 2026

How AI Is Changing Endpoint Selection Before a Trial Even Starts

In this video interview, Claire Riches, VP of clinical solutions at Citeline, explains how AI is expanding endpoint selection beyond the bounded experience of a single sponsor team—and surfacing options that traditional design thinking might never have considered.

In a recent video interview with Applied Clinical Trials, Claire Riches, VP of clinical solutions at Citeline, discussed how AI is transforming the way sponsors approach trial design—from endpoint selection and protocol pressure-testing to risk management and operational planning—and what clinical operations professionals just beginning to use these tools should keep in mind. She opened by reframing endpoint selection as something that can now draw on thousands of comparable trials rather than the bounded experience of a single sponsor's internal team, using AI to surface not just what has worked but what caused past trials to fail at the endpoint level, including endpoints from adjacent therapeutic areas that might not have entered standard design thinking.

On trial simulations, Riches identified three categories of design flaws that AI is particularly well-suited to surface: overly restrictive inclusion-exclusion criteria that look reasonable on paper but dramatically narrow the real-world patient funnel; patient behavior patterns including dropout rates and visit compliance that make the difference between a trial with enough data to submit and one that stalls; and structural assumptions around comparator arms and wash-out periods that can be stress-tested before a single amendment is needed.

She described the most valuable data inputs for protocol pressure-testing as the combination of analog trial performance—what was planned versus what actually happened in comparable studies—and real-world patient data that grounds enrollment assumptions in what is genuinely achievable rather than aspirational. Site-level recruitment history, she added, matters as much as site participation history.

Throughout, Riches was consistent in placing humans at the center of final decision-making, framing AI as a sophisticated advisor that generates evidence while the clinical trial team makes the call. She closed with a practical message for ClinOps professionals just starting their AI journey: the tools are accessible at every scale, the cost barrier is lower than many assume, and waiting for competitors to move first is a mistake.


Related to this article

What Expanding AI Ecosystems Mean for Sponsor Complexity and Oversight
In this video interview, Rajneesh Patil, global head of AI, digital, and innovation in clinical development at Syneos Health, argues that CROs must act as orchestrators rather than aggregators—and that the real test of any AI ecosystem is whether it reduces sponsor coordination burden or just hands it back to them.
Where AI Governance in Clinical Development Falls Short
In this video interview, Rajneesh Patil, global head of AI, digital, and innovation in clinical development at Syneos Health, identifies three recurring failure modes in AI governance frameworks—and explains why responsible AI must be an ongoing operating discipline, not a one-time approval gate.
© 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.