We Tackled Clinical Trials Data Inaccuracy So You Don’t Have To

Clinical research is a conservative industry – when something new makes its way to the influencers and the KOLs, the big established companies can be quite skeptical. After all, though they may have resources, they also have a lot to risk by investing in a trend that won’t be relevant tomorrow. 

And in many ways, despite working with some of the biggest CROs and sponsor companies, we still are the new kids on the block compared to established feasibility platforms like Citeline and GlobalData

So what makes us special? And why are we not only here to stay but here to change the game, grow, improve and reshape the industry? 

It all started with the patient

FindMeCure was established with the mission of providing a link between the patient and the clinical research industry. To support the patient, we developed a patient-friendly search platform linked to ClinicalTrials.gov where patients can easily find relevant studies by entering their condition. 

To further bring research closer to patients, we supported the industry with patient recruitment services. This is where we began to realize there was something broken in the process.

Many trials were not designed with the patient in mind. Frequent site visits were expected of patients who could barely stand up from their beds. Where standard of care was high, trials could not entice patients that already felt taken care of. Patients’ awareness and trust in research were often not taken into account. In short, a lot of recruitment issues could’ve been prevented right from the start – the planning of the trial. 

But why was this the case?

Feasibility professionals are overwhelmed

We started talking to the people in charge of creating a clinical trial strategy. Feasibility experts from CRO and sponsor companies all had one thing in common – they were overwhelmed. 

The data they needed was scattered and often unreliable (we’ve already addressed the issues with clinical trial registries) and they had tight deadlines to meet. They cared about the patient and wanted to factor in their condition and country-specific journey. Yet getting insights about the local standard of care, drug reimbursement, and patient needs was a hassle. 

On top of that, country and site selection had to be done by relying on another set of considerations. Considerations like recruitment rates, past experience and competition. They were already hard to find and calculate, especially in the case of recruitment rates. 

Of course, a lot of companies rely on the gold standard feasibility platforms – Citeline and GlobalData. Feasibility experts prefer Citeline, we found, while business development people find GlobalData more helpful. 

Still, they need more: more convenience, more speed, and above all more accurate data. CROs especially are overwhelmed by the many RFPs they need to handle in a short, less than 10 days, period of time. For professionals working on RFPs, this is barely enough time to get all the data, let alone do the back-and-forth with colleagues from local offices or KOLs to get more in-depth insights for each potential country. 

TrialHub was built for feasibility 

The many conversations we had with feasibility professionals helped us understand what they really need out of a feasibility platform. It became our mission to create a platform that lifted the burden of manual research off their shoulders completely

We designed TrialHub with their jobs-to-be-done in mind, making it so intuitive as to eliminate the learning curve of working with a new program. For example, site selection happens by first finding trials similar to your protocol, examining their recruitment rates, and exporting the list of sites for further review. 

In fact, our clients frequently note how friendly and easy-to-use TrialHub is compared to their previous vendor. 

This is because TrialHub is not just another data platform. It’s a tool designed specifically to fit the needs of feasibility professionals and help them prepare impressive RFPs in less time. Don’t just take our word for it, see how Bionical Emas reduced time spent on RFPs by 30% while increasing their hit rate. 

TrialHub grows with your feedback

One of the perks of being a smaller company is agility. Our clients and partners are always surprised by how quickly we implement their feedback into our platform.  

We do this because it’s important to us that TrialHub grows to fit the needs and workflow of the professionals who use it. This is why we hold quarterly meetings with our clients and take their feedback to heart. 

When we notice an underserved need in the industry, we can be quick to respond. This is how we developed the first version of our Reimbursed Drugs module in a matter of a quarter. We were determined to help professionals understand why patients and investigators would be interested in their trial. 

It also helps that our internal motto is “Work smarter, not harder”. We’re constantly developing ingenious in-house algorithms to get all of the data our clients need with none of the hassle. 

TrialHub’s data is the most accurate 

There, we said it. It may sound like a bold statement but we have the proof to back it up. Last year a company we were talking to was considering switching to TrialHub because their current vendor was showing a lot of duplicates. With so many duplicate trials and investigators, they couldn’t fully trust their calculations. 

Duplicates are a serious and hard-to-avoid issue. This is why you will find them even in established feasibility platforms. Yet, we were determined to stand out from the rest by having the most accurate data. 

It took us a while but this year that same company compared our data to the data they got from that other ‘gold standard’ platform. They had a lot of duplicates still, while we had none at all

And this is not the only way we tackle data accuracy. 

TrialHub performs daily data updates. What this means is that our platform, linked to 80 000 data sources (including all clinical trial registries), recalculates every time there is an update to one of our sources in order to provide you with the most accurate predictions for your trial. 

Recently, another CRO that was considering switching feasibility platforms, compared us to their current data provider. They were concerned because TrialHub was showing them fewer trials than the platform they were using. 

After investigating, we found that the other platform was showing some trials that were not about the selected condition at all… Some of the trials had not been updated recently. Their status on the platform differed from their latest status listed in the register. That’s not all – the other platform was actually missing relevant trials so it wasn’t providing the whole picture of the clinical trials landscape. 

TrialHub, on the other hand, showed only relevant trials. And thanks to daily data updates all of the trials were up to date with their original data sources.

Again, don’t just take our word for it! Send us a list of the trials your current platform shows for the condition you’re working on. We will compare the two sets of data and provide you with all of the information you need. 

Worst case scenario – you get another perspective on the landscape you’re interested in for free.

Scroll to Top