Clinical Trial Software & Data Collection – Trial Decentralisation & Post-COVID-19

Clinical trial technology update: from decentralisation to CROs.

One of the major discussion topics was decentralised trials. The specialist explained that, if using a loose definition, these have always been taking place. However, “if we use a more reasonable and stricter definition of a decentralised trial where we not only have options for patients of where they want to experience a trial and where the operations actually occur”, among other aspects, then “there are far fewer companies that are actually doing decentralised trials”.

The advantages and disadvantages of decentralised trials were discussed, with it being noted that “frankly, there’s no one that can decide [whether this approach is better] except the patient”. Reduced trial costs could also be the wrong metric to pay attention to: “Our goal would be to get a drug on the market quicker from a pharma perspective. From a patient perspective, we want to make it easier for the patient within the trial.”

Another topic on the agenda was contract research organisations (CROs). The former senior executive expects more tech purchasing and outsourcing to go to technology companies rather than CROs. The specialist explained that CROs tend to be a “headwind” for pharma companies and “inherently have no vested interest in speeding things up unless it’s a competitive advantage”.

Various companies were highlighted, including Science 37, Medidata and Veeva, as well as which firms are the strongest from a technological standpoint. 

To access all the human insights from Third Bridge Forum’s Clinical Trial Software & Data Collection – Trial Decentralisation & Post-COVID-19 Interview, click here to view the full transcript.