In this video interview following the 2026 DIA Global Annual Meeting, Jonathan Andrus, co-CEO of CRIO, explains why integrating site-level data systems with sponsor oversight has remained so difficult, what a central eSource model requires to work for all stakeholders, and why the industry needs to stop waiting for perfection and start taking the step.
In a recent video interview with Applied Clinical Trials following the 2026 DIA Global Annual Meeting, Jonathan Andrus, co-CEO of CRIO, discussed the persistent challenge of fragmentation between site-level data systems and sponsor oversight, and what a more integrated eSource model could look like in practice. He opened by reframing why the problem has been so difficult to solve: sponsors have historically built their tools around their own submission and data collection needs, which is rational, but as sites become more technologically mature, there is a growing opportunity to bridge those two worlds. He pointed to emerging standards—particularly USDM—as creating meaningful momentum toward the kind of shared data infrastructure that has long been discussed but rarely realized.
On what integration actually requires, Andrus described CRIO's approach through what the company calls central eSource: a model in which sponsors provide sites with a protocol-driven template for data collection while preserving site autonomy to create local configurations that reflect their own workflows and requirements. The combination of standardized structure and site-level flexibility, he argued, is what makes the model genuinely useful for both parties rather than another burden imposed on already stretched site teams.
Andrus closed by reflecting on the energy in the room at his DIA session—standing room only at 4:15 on a Tuesday—as a signal of how much appetite exists for practical solutions to these problems. The takeaway that resonated most with him, offered by a fellow panelist, was simple: stop waiting for perfection. The industry has a tendency to stall on models that aren't fully polished, when the more important move is to take the step, try the approach, and learn from it. For sites already struggling to manage growing trial complexity, anything that reduces administrative burden and frees attention for patient recruitment, retention, and safety monitoring is a meaningful win.
