Abstract
The past decade has seen substantial innovation in clinical trials, including new trial formats, endpoints, and others. Also there have been regulatory changes, increasing competitive pressures and other external factors which impact clinical trials. In parallel, trial timelines have increased and success rates remain stubbornly low. This has led many observers to question whether clinical trials have become overly complex and if this complexity is always needed. Here we present a large-scale analysis of protocols and other data from over 16,000 trials. Using a machine learning algorithm, we automatically assessed key features of these trials, such as number of endpoints, number of inclusion-exclusion criteria and others. Using a regression analysis we combined these features into a new metric, the Trial Complexity Score, which correlates with overall clinical trial duration. Looking at this score across different clinical phases and therapeutic areas we see substantial increases over time, suggesting that clinical trials are indeed becoming more complex. We discuss drivers of increasing trial complexity, necessary or helpful ('good') complexity versus unnecessary ('bad') complexity, and we explore mechanisms of how sponsors of clinical trials can reduce trial complexity where appropriate.