With most trials failing to meet enrollment timelines, current approaches for feasibility fall short of identifying and minimizing risk. Sponsors must arm themselves with the right tools to own this analysis throughout the trial lifecycle. We will discuss a quantitative approach that operationalizes feasibility score tracking.
Luke Stewart used this presentation at Clinical Trial Innovation Summit in Boston on April 25, 2017.
So many stats… Preaching to the choir; we all know this
Committed to improve patient experience: at least present opportunity to join trial that may help them soon; get therapy to market sooner to address indication
Cost factor
Patient centricity
[graph with historical nature of problem]
When feel losing, don’t keep score. Important to keep score like a scrimmage/pre-season so can assess and improve. Ex. Learning golf
Who’s Keeping Score
Feedback Loop – Assess Actual vs Projected Trial/Site Performance
Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria evaluation
As get more real-time info then can have higher confidence of the enrollment performance of your study/site; goal is to know this earlier so can avoid site abandonment and instead focus resources on sites with highest potential
Benefits of this approach
Systematic (limits bias of PI and CRO)
Institutionalizes lessons learned about studies/protocols