Dynamic treatment regimes have been proposed to personalize treatment decisions by utilizing historical patient data, but they may not always improve on the current standard of care. It is thus meaningful to integrate the standard of care into the evaluation of treatment strategies, and previous works have suggested doing so through the concept of clinical utility. Here we will focus on the comparative component of clinical utility as the average outcome had the full population received treatment based on the proposed dynamic treatment regime in comparison to the full population receiving the ``standard" treatment assignment mechanism, such as a physician's choice. Clinical trials to evaluate clinical utility are rarely conducted, and thus, previous works have proposed an emulated clinical trial framework using observational data. However, only one simple estimator was previously suggested, and the practical details of how one would conduct this emulated trial were not detailed. Here, we illuminate these details and propose several estimators of clinical utility based on estimators proposed in the dynamic treatment regime literature. We illustrate the considerations and the estimat
Introduction: Even in effectively conducted randomised trials, the probability of a successful study remains relatively low. With recent advances in the next-generation sequencing technologies, there is a rapidly growing number of high-dimensional data, including genetic, molecular and phenotypic information, that have improved our understanding of driver genes, drug targets, and drug mechanisms of action. The leveraging of high-dimensional data holds promise for increased success of clinical trials. Methods: We provide an overview of methods for utilising high-dimensional data in clinical trials. We also investigate the use of these methods in practice through a review of recently published randomised clinical trials that utilise high-dimensional genetic data. The review includes articles that were published between 2019 and 2021, identified through the PubMed database. Results: Out of 174 screened articles, 100 (57.5%) were randomised clinical trials that collected high-dimensional data. The most common clinical area was oncology (30%), followed by chronic diseases (28%), nutrition and ageing (18%) and cardiovascular diseases (7%). The most common types of data analysed were gene
Analyzing data from past clinical trials is part of the ongoing effort to optimize the design, implementation, and execution of new clinical trials and more efficiently bring life-saving interventions to market. While there have been recent advances in the generation of static context synthetic clinical trial data, due to both limited patient availability and constraints imposed by patient privacy needs, the generation of fine-grained synthetic time-sequential clinical trial data has been challenging. Given that patient trajectories over an entire clinical trial are of high importance for optimizing trial design and efforts to prevent harmful adverse events, there is a significant need for the generation of high-fidelity time-sequence clinical trial data. Here we introduce TrialSynth, a Variational Autoencoder (VAE) designed to address the specific challenges of generating synthetic time-sequence clinical trial data. Distinct from related clinical data VAE methods, the core of our method leverages Hawkes Processes (HP), which are particularly well-suited for modeling event-type and time gap prediction needed to capture the structure of sequential clinical trial data. Our experiment
The competency of any intelligent agent is bounded by its formal account of the world in which it operates. Clinical AI lacks such an account. Existing frameworks address evaluation, regulation, or system design in isolation, without a shared model of the clinical world to connect them. We introduce the Clinical World Model, a framework that formalizes care as a tripartite interaction among Patient, Provider, and Ecosystem. To formalize how any agent, whether human or artificial, transforms information into clinical action, we develop parallel decision-making architectures for providers, patients, and AI agents, grounded in validated principles of clinical cognition. The Clinical AI Skill-Mix operationalizes competency through eight dimensions. Five define the clinical competency space (condition, phase, care setting, provider role, and task) and three specify how AI engages human reasoning (assigned authority, agent facing, and anchoring layer). The combinatorial product of these dimensions yields a space of billions of distinct competency coordinates. A central structural implication is that validation within one coordinate provides minimal evidence for performance in another, re
Where there are a limited number of patients, such as in a rare disease, clinical trials in these small populations present several challenges, including statistical issues. This led to an EU FP7 call for proposals in 2013. One of the three projects funded was the Innovative Methodology for Small Populations Research (InSPiRe) project. This paper summarizes the main results of the project, which was completed in 2017. The InSPiRe project has led to development of novel statistical methodology for clinical trials in small populations in four areas. We have explored new decision-making methods for small population clinical trials using a Bayesian decision-theoretic framework to compare costs with potential benefits, developed approaches for targeted treatment trials, enabling simultaneous identification of subgroups and confirmation of treatment effect for these patients, worked on early phase clinical trial design and on extrapolation from adult to pediatric studies, developing methods to enable use of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics data, and also developed improved robust meta-analysis methods for a small number of trials to support the planning, analysis and interpretation
In the context of clinical research, computational models have received increasing attention over the past decades. In this systematic review, we aimed to provide an overview of the role of so-called in silico clinical trials (ISCTs) in medical applications. Exemplary for the broad field of clinical medicine, we focused on in silico (IS) methods applied in drug development, sometimes also referred to as model informed drug development (MIDD). We searched PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov for published articles and registered clinical trials related to ISCTs. We identified 202 articles and 48 trials, and of these, 76 articles and 19 trials were directly linked to drug development. We extracted information from all 202 articles and 48 clinical trials and conducted a more detailed review of the methods used in the 76 articles that are connected to drug development. Regarding application, most articles and trials focused on cancer and imaging-related research while rare and pediatric diseases were only addressed in 14 articles and 5 trials, respectively. While some models were informed combining mechanistic knowledge with clinical or preclinical (in-vivo or in-vitro) data, the majority of
While interest in the application of machine learning to improve healthcare has grown tremendously in recent years, a number of barriers prevent deployment in medical practice. A notable concern is the potential to exacerbate entrenched biases and existing health disparities in society. The area of fairness in machine learning seeks to address these issues of equity; however, appropriate approaches are context-dependent, necessitating domain-specific consideration. We focus on clinical trials, i.e., research studies conducted on humans to evaluate medical treatments. Clinical trials are a relatively under-explored application in machine learning for healthcare, in part due to complex ethical, legal, and regulatory requirements and high costs. Our aim is to provide a multi-disciplinary assessment of how fairness for machine learning fits into the context of clinical trials research and practice. We start by reviewing the current ethical considerations and guidelines for clinical trials and examine their relationship with common definitions of fairness in machine learning. We examine potential sources of unfairness in clinical trials, providing concrete examples, and discuss the role
Platform trials gained popularity during the last few years as they increase flexibility compared to multi-arm trials by allowing new experimental arms entering when the trial already started. Using a shared control group in platform trials increases the trial efficiency compared to separate trials. Because of the later entry of some of the experimental treatment arms, the shared control group includes concurrent and non-concurrent control data. For a given experimental arm, non-concurrent controls refer to patients allocated to the control arm before the arm enters the trial, while concurrent controls refer to control patients that are randomised concurrently to the experimental arm. Using non-concurrent controls can result in bias in the estimate in case of time trends if the appropriate methodology is not used and the assumptions are not met. In this paper, we faced two main objectives. In the first, we aimed to identify the methods currently available for incorporating non-concurrent controls, clarify the key concepts and assumptions, and name the main characteristics of each method. For this purpose, we systematically searched research articles on methods to include non-concur
Defining the Inclusion/Exclusion (I/E) criteria of a trial is one of the most important steps during a trial design. Increasingly complex I/E criteria potentially create information imbalance and transparency issues between the people who design and run the trials and those who consume the information produced by the trials. In order to better understand and quantify the impact of a category of I/E criteria on observed treatment effects, a concept, named the Selection Induced Contrast Estimate (SICE) effect, is introduced and formulated in this paper. The SICE effect can exist in controlled clinical trials when treatment affects the correlation between a marker used for selection and the response of interest. This effect is demonstrated with both simulations and real clinical trial data. Although the statistical elements behind the SICE effect have been well studied, explicitly formulating and studying this effect can benefit several areas, including better transparency in I/E criteria, meta-analysis of multiple clinical trials, treatment effect interpretation in real-world medical practice, etc.
Identifying cohorts of patients based on eligibility criteria such as medical conditions, procedures, and medication use is critical to recruitment for clinical trials. Such criteria are often most naturally described in free-text, using language familiar to clinicians and researchers. In order to identify potential participants at scale, these criteria must first be translated into queries on clinical databases, which can be labor-intensive and error-prone. Natural language processing (NLP) methods offer a potential means of such conversion into database queries automatically. However they must first be trained and evaluated using corpora which capture clinical trials criteria in sufficient detail. In this paper, we introduce the Leaf Clinical Trials (LCT) corpus, a human-annotated corpus of over 1,000 clinical trial eligibility criteria descriptions using highly granular structured labels capturing a range of biomedical phenomena. We provide details of our schema, annotation process, corpus quality, and statistics. Additionally, we present baseline information extraction results on this corpus as benchmarks for future work.
The first cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were reported in December 2019 and the outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 was declared a pandemic in March 2020 by the World Health Organization. This sparked a plethora of investigations into diagnostics and vaccination for SARS-CoV-2, as well as treatments for COVID-19. Since COVID-19 is a severe disease associated with a high mortality, clinical trials in this disease should be monitored by a data monitoring committee (DMC), also known as data safety monitoring board (DSMB). DMCs in this indication face a number of challenges including fast recruitment requiring an unusually high frequency of safety reviews, more frequent use of complex designs and virtually no prior experience with the disease. In this paper, we provide a perspective on the work of DMCs for clinical trials of treatments for COVID-19. More specifically, we discuss organizational aspects of setting up and running DMCs for COVID-19 trials, in particular for trials with more complex designs such as platform trials or adaptive designs. Furthermore, statistical aspects of monitoring clinical trials of treatments for COVID-19 are considered. Some recommendations are made rega
Clinical trials are an indispensable part of the drug development process, bridging the gap between basic research and clinical application. During the development of new drugs, clinical trials are used not only to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the drug but also to explore its dosage, treatment regimens, and potential side effects. This review discusses the various stages of clinical trials, including Phase I (safety assessment), Phase II (preliminary efficacy evaluation), Phase III (large-scale validation), and Phase IV (post-marketing surveillance), highlighting the characteristics of each phase and their interrelationships. Additionally, the paper addresses the major challenges encountered in clinical trials, such as ethical issues, subject recruitment difficulties, diversity and representativeness concerns, and proposes strategies for overcoming these challenges. With the advancement of technology, innovative technologies such as artificial intelligence, big data, and digitalization are gradually transforming clinical trial design and implementation, improving trial efficiency and data quality. The article also looks forward to the future of clinical trials, particularly
Background: In settings where proof-of-principle trials have succeeded but the effectiveness of different forms of implementation remains uncertain, trials that not only generate information about intervention effects but also provide public health benefit would be useful. Cluster randomized trials (CRT) capture both direct and indirect intervention effects; the latter depends heavily on contact networks within and across clusters. We propose a novel class of connectivity-informed trial designs that leverages information about such networks in order to improve public health impact and preserve ability to detect intervention effects. Methods: We consider CRTs in which the order of enrollment is based on the total number of ties between individuals across clusters (based either on the total number of inter-cluster connections or on connections only to untreated clusters). We include options analogous both to traditional Parallel and Stepped Wedge designs. We also allow for control clusters to be "held-back" from re-randomization for some period. We investigate the performance epidemic control and power to detect vaccine effect performance of these designs by simulating vaccination tr
Efficacy testing is a cornerstone of clinical trials, ensuring that medical interventions achieve their intended therapeutic effects. Over the decades, a wide range of statistical methodologies have been developed to address the complexities of clinical trial data, including parametric, nonparametric, Bayesian, and machine learning approaches. Parametric methods, such as t-tests, ANOVA, and LMMs, have traditionally been the foundation of efficacy testing due to their efficiency under well-defined assumptions. Nonparametric techniques, including the Friedman test, Brunner-Munzel test, and modern extensions like nparLD, have emerged as robust alternatives, particularly for skewed, ordinal, or non-normal data. Bayesian methodologies have enabled the incorporation of prior information and uncertainty quantification, while machine learning techniques, such as deep learning and reinforcement learning, are revolutionizing trial designs and outcome predictions. Despite these advancements, significant gaps remain, including challenges in handling high-dimensional data, missingness, and ensuring equitable efficacy testing across diverse populations. This review provides a comprehensive overv
Clinical trial eligibility matching is a critical yet often labor-intensive and error-prone step in medical research, as it ensures that participants meet precise criteria for safe and reliable study outcomes. Recent advances in Natural Language Processing (NLP) have shown promise in automating and improving this process by rapidly analyzing large volumes of unstructured clinical text and structured electronic health record (EHR) data. In this paper, we present a systematic overview of current NLP methodologies applied to clinical trial eligibility screening, focusing on data sources, annotation practices, machine learning approaches, and real-world implementation challenges. A comprehensive literature search (spanning Google Scholar, Mendeley, and PubMed from 2015 to 2024) yielded high-quality studies, each demonstrating the potential of techniques such as rule-based systems, named entity recognition, contextual embeddings, and ontology-based normalization to enhance patient matching accuracy. While results indicate substantial improvements in screening efficiency and precision, limitations persist regarding data completeness, annotation consistency, and model scalability across d
Clinical trial outcome prediction seeks to estimate the likelihood that a clinical trial will successfully reach its intended endpoint. This process predominantly involves the development of machine learning models that utilize a variety of data sources such as descriptions of the clinical trials, characteristics of the drug molecules, and specific disease conditions being targeted. Accurate predictions of trial outcomes are crucial for optimizing trial planning and prioritizing investments in a drug portfolio. While previous research has largely concentrated on small-molecule drugs, there is a growing need to focus on biologics-a rapidly expanding category of therapeutic agents that often lack the well-defined molecular properties associated with traditional drugs. Additionally, applying conventional methods like graph neural networks to biologics data proves challenging due to their complex nature. To address these challenges, we introduce the Language Interaction Network (LINT), a novel approach that predicts trial outcomes using only the free-text descriptions of the trials. We have rigorously tested the effectiveness of LINT across three phases of clinical trials, where it ach
Increasing demands on medical imaging departments are taking a toll on the radiologist's ability to deliver timely and accurate reports. Recent technological advances in artificial intelligence have demonstrated great potential for automatic radiology report generation (ARRG), sparking an explosion of research. This survey paper conducts a methodological review of contemporary ARRG approaches by way of (i) assessing datasets based on characteristics, such as availability, size, and adoption rate, (ii) examining deep learning training methods, such as contrastive learning and reinforcement learning, (iii) exploring state-of-the-art model architectures, including variations of CNN and transformer models, (iv) outlining techniques integrating clinical knowledge through multimodal inputs and knowledge graphs, and (v) scrutinising current model evaluation techniques, including commonly applied NLP metrics and qualitative clinical reviews. Furthermore, the quantitative results of the reviewed models are analysed, where the top performing models are examined to seek further insights. Finally, potential new directions are highlighted, with the adoption of additional datasets from other rad
Recent advances in LLMs have greatly improved general-domain NLP tasks. Yet, their adoption in critical domains, such as clinical trial recruitment, remains limited. As trials are designed in natural language and patient data is represented as both structured and unstructured text, the task of matching trials and patients benefits from knowledge aggregation and reasoning abilities of LLMs. Classical approaches are trial-specific and LLMs with their ability to consolidate distributed knowledge hold the potential to build a more general solution. Yet recent applications of LLM-assisted methods rely on proprietary models and weak evaluation benchmarks. In this survey, we are the first to analyze the task of trial-patient matching and contextualize emerging LLM-based approaches in clinical trial recruitment. We critically examine existing benchmarks, approaches and evaluation frameworks, the challenges to adopting LLM technologies in clinical research and exciting future directions.
Utilizing Bayesian methods in clinical trials has become increasingly popular, as they can incorporate historical data and expert opinions into the design and allow for smaller sample sizes to reduce costs while providing reliable and robust statistical results. Sample size determination (SSD) is a key aspect of clinical trial design and various methods for Bayesian sample size determination are available. However, it is unclear how these methods are being used in practice. A systematic literature review was conducted to understand how sample sizes for Bayesian randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are determined and inform the design of future Bayesian trials. We searched five databases in May 2023, and updated in January 2025, including efficacy RCTs in humans which utilized a Bayesian framework for the primary data analysis, published in English, and enrolled participants between 2009 and 2024. The literature search produced 19,182 records, of which 105 studies were selected for data extraction. Results show that the most common method for SSD in Bayesian RCTs was a hybrid approach in which elements of Bayesian and frequentist theory are combined. Many RCTs did not provide a justifi
Objective: Integrating EHR data with other resources is essential in rare disease research due to low disease prevalence. Such integration is dependent on the alignment of ontologies used for data annotation. The International Classification of Diseases (ICD) is used to annotate clinical diagnoses; the Human Phenotype Ontology (HPO) to annotate phenotypes. Although these ontologies overlap in biomedical entities described, the extent to which they are interoperable is unknown. We investigate how well aligned these ontologies are and whether such alignments facilitate EHR data integration. Materials and Methods: We conducted an empirical analysis of the coverage of mappings between ICD and HPO. We interpret this mapping coverage as a proxy for how easily clinical data can be integrated with research ontologies such as HPO. We quantify how exhaustively ICD codes are mapped to HPO by analyzing mappings in the UMLS Metathesaurus. We analyze the proportion of ICD codes mapped to HPO within a real-world EHR dataset. Results and Discussion: Our analysis revealed that only 2.2% of ICD codes have direct mappings to HPO in UMLS. Within our EHR dataset, less than 50% of ICD codes have mapping