ArticleClinical pharmacology and therapeutics2025
Regulatory Interactions and Learnings-RADIAL the Trials@Home Proof-of-Concept Trial on Decentralization.
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 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Feasibility, validation and application of digital tools for remote monitoring in neuromuscular diseases: the DT4RD protocol.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Bringing Trial Activities to Participants-The Trials@Home RADIAL Proof-of-Concept Trial Investigating Decentralization of Trials.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2025Article
- The Supply of Investigational Medicinal Product and Management of Study Materials for Decentralized Participants-Insights from the Trials@Home RADIAL Proof-of-Concept Trial.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2025Article
- Selecting and Preparing Clinical Sites for the Successful Conduct of Decentralized Clinical Trial Activities-Findings From the Trials@Home RADIAL Proof-of-Concept Trial.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper is part of a series of six publications presenting lessons learned during the setup, regulatory submission, and conduct of the proof-of-concept Trials@Home RADIAL trial. The three-arm RADIAL trial, comprising fully decentralized, hybrid, and conventional arms, is the first clinical study to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of decentralized clinical trial elements across six European countries. In this paper, insights from multiple formal regulatory interactions related to the RADIAL trial, conducted between 2021 and 2022, are presented. These interactions included (i) a consultation with the European Medicines Agency's Innovation Task Force, (ii) a national Scientific Advice procedure, and (iii) the clinical trial application submission under the EU Clinical Trials Regulation (Regulation EU 536/2014). Given the novelty of the decentralized approach and lack of guidelines, many constructive comments and questions were received that supported the finalization of the protocol and conduct of the trial. It is important to acknowledge that clinical trials often span multiple countries and regulatory jurisdictions, creating complexity due to variations in complementary national legal and regulatory requirements. We conclude that early and continuous regulatory engagement is essential for the successful implementation of innovative trial designs. Although progress has been made in supporting decentralized clinical trials, persistent challenges related to legislative heterogeneity remain. Harmonized regulatory guidance and greater transparency through the sharing of regulatory experiences will be key to facilitating the broader adoption of decentralized approaches and advancing clinical trials in Europe.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.