Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39072949›Full record

ArticleClinical and translational science2024

Assessing the net financial benefits of employing digital endpoints in clinical trials.

Joseph A DiMasi, Abigail Dirks, Zachary Smith, Sarah Valentine, Jennifer C Goldsack, Thomas Metcalfe, Upinder Grewal, Lada Leyens, Ute Conradi, Daniel Karlin and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and translational science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Joseph A DiMasiTufts Center for the Study of Drug Development, Tufts University, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3432-6928
Abigail DirksTufts Center for the Study of Drug Development, Tufts University, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Zachary SmithTufts Center for the Study of Drug Development, Tufts University, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Sarah ValentineDigital Medicine Society, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1814-7321
Jennifer C GoldsackDigital Medicine Society, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Thomas MetcalfeF. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd., Basel, Switzerland.
Upinder GrewalBayer AG, Reading, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3216-9594
Lada LeyensTakeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited, Zurich, Switzerland.
Ute ConradiUCB S.A., Monheim, Germany.
Daniel KarlinMindMed Inc., New York, New York, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6038-6943
Lesley MaloneyGenentech Inc., Washington, DC, USA.
Kenneth A GetzTufts Center for the Study of Drug Development, Tufts University, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Bert HartogJanssen-Cilag B.V., Breda, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-6631-2379

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the last few decades, developers of new drugs, biologics, and devices have increasingly leveraged digital health technologies (DHTs) to assess clinical trial digital endpoints. To our knowledge, a comprehensive assessment of the financial net benefits of digital endpoints in clinical trials has not been conducted. We obtained data from the Digital Medicine Society (DiMe) Library of Digital Endpoints and the US clinical trials registry, ClinicalTrials.gov. The benefit metrics are changes in trial phase duration and enrollment associated with the use of digital endpoints. The cost metric was obtained from an industry survey of the costs of including digital endpoints in clinical trials. We developed an expected net present value (eNPV) model of the cash flows for new drug development and commercialization to assess financial value. The value measure is the increment in eNPV that occurs when digital endpoints are employed. We also calculated a return on investment (ROI) as the ratio of the estimated increment in eNPV to the mean digital endpoint implementation cost. For phase II trials, the increase in eNPV varied from $2.2 million to $3.3 million, with ROIs between 32% and 48% per indication. The net benefits were substantially higher for phase III trials, with the increase in eNPV varying from $27 million to $40 million, with ROIs that were four to six times the investment. The use of digital endpoints in clinical trials can provide substantial extra value to sponsors developing new drugs, with high ROIs.

Indexed as

Endpoint DeterminationClinical Trials as TopicClinical Trials, Phase II as TopicCost-Benefit AnalysisDigital TechnologyDrug DevelopmentHumansModels, EconomicUnited States

Identifiers

PMID39072949
PMCPMC11284240

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.