Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39973085›Full record

ArticleClinical pharmacology and therapeutics2025

Decision-Making Criteria and Methods for Initiating Late-Stage Clinical Trials in Drug Development From a Multi-Stakeholder Perspective: A Scoping Review.

Ce Jiang, Céline Beji, Sonia Zebachi, Ghinwa Y Hayek, Aysun Cetinyurek-Yavuz, Muhammad Bergas N Fayyad, Laura Rodwell, Kit C B Roes, Billy Amzal, Christoph Gerlinger and 2 more

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

12 authors.

Ce JiangQuinten Health, Paris, France.ORCID 0009-0008-3775-7070
Céline BejiParis Cité University, Paris, France.
Sonia ZebachiQuinten Health, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0003-1035-8690
Ghinwa Y HayekQuinten Health, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0001-7046-209X
Aysun Cetinyurek-YavuzRadboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-4024-8775
Muhammad Bergas N FayyadRadboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0009-0007-7835-2451
Laura RodwellRadboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-5635-4997
Kit C B RoesRadboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-6775-1963
Billy AmzalQuinten Health, Paris, France.
Christoph GerlingerBayer AG, Statistics & Data Insights, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-4538-6413
Raphaël PorcherParis Cité University, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0002-5277-4679
Julien TanniouQuinten Health, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0002-3806-2413

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The decision-making process in drug development involves "go/no-go" decisions, particularly at the transition from early to late-stage trials. While the decisions are solely made by drug developers, they must take into account the perspectives of multiple stakeholders-such as regulatory agencies, HTA bodies, payers, patients, and ethics committees-to ensure well-informed and robust decision-making. These perspectives influence key considerations, including resource allocation, risk mitigation, regulatory compliance, etc. To support this process, quantitative methodologies, including Bayesian and hybrid frequentist-Bayesian approaches, have been introduced to improve decision-making. However, these methodologies often do not fully account for the diverse priorities and needs of all stakeholders. This scoping review examines criteria and methods used in decision-making at the phase II to III transition, with a focus on broadening the probability of success (PoS) concept beyond efficacy alone. Our review explores PoS for different success definitions, such as regulatory approval, market access, financial viability, and competitive performance. Key themes include decision criteria selection, trial design optimization, utility-based approaches, financial metrics, and multi-stakeholder considerations in decision-making. Our findings highlight both the limitations of current methodologies and potential paths forward, including the integration of real-world data (RWD) and advanced analytics. This work complements a companion manuscript by Cetinyurek-Yavuz et al. (2025) providing a detailed review of PoS methodologies focused solely on efficacy, specifically PoS for achieving statistical significance in phase III studies, including definitions, terminologies, and analytical approaches. Together, these studies provide a foundation for advancing late-stage trial decisions toward a more balanced, data-driven, and stakeholder-aligned approach.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials, Phase II as TopicClinical Trials, Phase III as TopicDecision MakingDrug DevelopmentStakeholder ParticipationBayes TheoremHumansResearch Design

Identifiers

PMID39973085
PMCPMC11924168

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.