Clinical Trial Lifecycle: From Concept to Post-Marketing

Clinical trials follow a structured pathway that begins with laboratory research and preclinical testing, moves through sequential human study phases, and continues after regulatory approval through post-marketing surveillance. This lifecycle governs how investigational drugs, biologics, and medical devices are evaluated for safety and efficacy before they reach patients and how they remain under scrutiny once in widespread use. For students, researchers, and life-science professionals, understanding each stage helps clarify why trials are designed the way they are, what evidence regulators expect, and how real-world data continues to shape medical practice after a product launches.

The Purpose and Scope of the Clinical Trial Lifecycle

The clinical trial lifecycle exists to answer one central question: does this intervention work in humans, and is it safe enough to justify its use? Developers of drugs, biologicals, and medical devices must ensure product safety, demonstrate medical benefit in people, and mass produce the product. Preclinical development starts before clinical trials and the main goals are to determine safety and effectiveness of the intervention. If preclinical studies show that the therapy is safe and effective, clinical trials are started. Clinical trial phases are steps in the research to determine if an intervention would be beneficial or detrimental to humans and include Phases 0, I, II, III, IV, and V clinical studies. Understanding the basis of clinical trial phases will help researchers plan and implement clinical study protocols and, by doing so, improve the number of therapies coming to market for patients.

The lifecycle is not a single event but a continuum of evidence generation. Each phase has distinct objectives, patient populations, sample sizes, and endpoints. Early phases focus on safety and dosing, later phases test efficacy in larger populations, and post-marketing studies monitor long-term effects in real-world settings. Regulatory agencies such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) provide guidance documents that shape how these studies are designed, conducted, and reported.

At a Glance: Clinical Trial Phases and Their Core Objectives

Phase I trials are designed to evaluate the safety and tolerability of a new treatment, typically with a small number of patients, generally spread across several dose levels. Phase II trials are designed to determine if the new treatment has sufficiently promising efficacy to warrant further investigation in a large-scale randomized phase III trial, as well as to further assess safety. These studies usually involve a few hundred patients.

Preclinical Development: Building the Evidence Foundation

Before any investigational product reaches a human subject, it must undergo extensive laboratory evaluation. Preclinical studies use cell cultures, tissue models, and animal subjects to characterize the intervention's pharmacological properties, toxicity profile, and potential therapeutic window. The World Health Organization's Laboratory Quality Management System Handbook provides a framework for ensuring that laboratory testing throughout this process meets quality standards. Reliable preclinical data depends on validated analytical methods, proper documentation, and quality control procedures that trace back to the laboratory environment where initial testing occurs.

The Laboratory Biosafety Manual from the World Health Organization addresses the safe handling of biological materials during research and development. Investigators working with infectious agents, genetically modified organisms, or human-derived samples must follow biosafety protocols that protect laboratory workers and the surrounding community. These safety considerations are particularly relevant for vaccine development and antiviral research, where live pathogens may be handled during efficacy testing.

Bioanalytical method validation is a critical component of preclinical development. The FDA's Bioanalytical Method Validation Guidance for Industry describes the expectations for demonstrating that analytical methods used to measure drug concentrations in biological matrices are accurate, precise, selective, and reproducible. Without validated bioanalytical methods, pharmacokinetic data generated in preclinical studies cannot be reliably interpreted, and the foundation for human dosing decisions becomes uncertain.

The Assay Guidance Manual from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences provides detailed protocols and best practices for developing and running the biochemical and cell-based assays used throughout drug discovery and development. These assays help researchers measure target engagement, potency, and selectivity before committing to animal studies.

Preclinical Trial Design Innovations

Traditional preclinical research has faced criticism for low reproducibility, which can lead to translation failures when promising animal results do not predict human outcomes. A new approach called the preclinical randomized controlled trial (preRCT) has been introduced to address this issue. In a multi-center preRCT using the alcohol deprivation effect model to assess ketamine and R-ketamine on alcohol relapse across three European research centers, ketamine significantly reduced relapse while R-ketamine showed efficacy only in females. A higher dose of R-ketamine was also effective in males. These sex-dependent effects were linked to plasma R-ketamine levels, which were two-fold higher in female compared to male rats. The preRCT demonstrated R-ketamine's effectiveness in reducing alcohol relapse and supported translation to a clinical RCT that accounts for sex-dependent effects.

This example illustrates how preclinical trial design can incorporate randomization, blinding, and multi-center coordination to generate more reliable evidence before human studies begin. The approach mirrors the rigor expected in clinical trials and helps reduce the risk of advancing compounds that will ultimately fail in humans.

Preclinical Requirements Across Therapeutic Areas

The depth and type of preclinical data required varies by therapeutic area. A review of EMA-approved non-HIV antiviral agents found heterogeneity in the methods used for efficacy studies, which is at least partly explained by the diverse nature of viruses and their hosts and the lack of general guidelines for antiviral pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics studies by the EMA. Clinical studies for these agents varied in sample sizes, ranging from a few hundred to several thousand patients. Many antiviral agents have a high potential for cytochrome P450 and other enzyme interactions, resulting in the need for a high number of drug-drug interaction studies.

For antifungal drug development, a review of EMA-approved antifungals found that pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic indices were scarcely investigated or mentioned in European Public Assessment Reports. Current antifungal EMA guidelines started emphasizing investigating pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic indices in 2010 and then again in 2016. This pattern shows that regulatory expectations evolve over time, and developers must stay current with the latest guidance for their specific therapeutic area.

Phase 0 and Phase I: First Human Exposure and Dose Finding

Phase 0 studies, also called exploratory investigational new drug studies, involve the administration of microdoses to a small number of participants. These studies generate preliminary pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic data without the full safety evaluation required for traditional Phase I trials. Phase 0 studies help developers make early go or no-go decisions about whether a compound has favorable drug-like properties in humans.

Phase I trials represent the first full-scale evaluation of safety and tolerability in humans. These studies typically enroll 20 to 80 patients, generally spread across several dose levels. The primary objectives are to determine the maximum tolerated dose, characterize the adverse event profile, and establish pharmacokinetic parameters such as absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion. Dose escalation proceeds through predefined cohorts, with safety data from each dose level informing the decision to advance to the next.

Dose Finding and Trial Design Considerations

Early-phase trial design must consider the specific resource constraints and overall goals of the drug development process. In oncology, for example, the design of a Phase I trial to evaluate the safety of a drug and recommend a dose for a subsequent Phase II trial has downstream consequences for the entire development program. Stylized simulation models of clinical trials in an oncology development process can quantify important relationships between early-phase trial designs and their consequences for the remaining phases of development.

Simulations can describe the relationship between a Phase II single-arm trial sample size and the likelihood of a positive result in a subsequent Phase III confirmatory trial, the impact of a Phase I dose-finding design on the likelihood that the development process will produce evidence of a safe and effective therapy, and the impact of a Phase II enrichment trial design on the operating characteristics of a subsequent Phase III confirmatory trial. These models support key decisions such as sample size in the design of early-phase trials and can estimate performance metrics under realistic scenarios, including the duration and total number of patients enrolled.

Phase II: Exploring Efficacy and Refining the Target Population

Phase II trials serve as the bridge between early safety evaluation and large-scale confirmatory testing. These studies are designed to determine if the new treatment has sufficiently promising efficacy to warrant further investigation in a large-scale randomized Phase III trial, as well as to further assess safety. Phase II studies usually involve a few hundred patients and may use a variety of designs, including single-arm, randomized, and enrichment approaches.

Common Phase II designs include Simon's two-stage design, which allows early stopping if the treatment shows insufficient activity, and randomized Phase II designs that compare the experimental treatment against a control arm. The choice of design depends on the disease area, the availability of historical controls, and the specific questions the trial seeks to answer. A comparison of three potential designs in the context of the NRG-HN002 trial illustrates how different Phase II approaches can yield different conclusions about whether to advance a treatment to Phase III.

Enrichment and Biomarker-Driven Designs

Phase II trials increasingly incorporate biomarker-based patient selection to enrich the study population for those most likely to respond. Enrichment designs can improve the efficiency of early efficacy testing but also affect the operating characteristics of subsequent confirmatory trials. If a Phase II trial enrolls only biomarker-positive patients, the Phase III trial must decide whether to use the same enrichment strategy or test the treatment in a broader population. These decisions have implications for sample size, statistical power, and the generalizability of trial results.

Phase III: Confirmatory Efficacy and Safety in Large Populations

Phase III trials provide the definitive evidence that regulators use to decide whether to approve a new treatment. These studies enroll several hundred to several thousand patients and are typically randomized, controlled, and often blinded. The primary endpoint is usually a clinically meaningful outcome such as survival, disease progression, or symptom improvement. Phase III trials must be adequately powered to detect clinically important treatment effects and must include comprehensive safety monitoring.

The intensive blood pressure control trial in patients with type 2 diabetes illustrates the scale and rigor of Phase III research. This trial enrolled 12,821 patients at 145 clinical sites across China. Patients were randomly assigned to receive intensive treatment that targeted a systolic blood pressure of less than 120 mm Hg or standard treatment that targeted a systolic blood pressure of less than 140 mm Hg for up to 5 years. The primary outcome was a composite of nonfatal stroke, nonfatal myocardial infarction, treatment or hospitalization for heart failure, or death from cardiovascular causes. During a median follow-up of 4.2 years, primary-outcome events occurred in 393 patients in the intensive-treatment group and 492 patients in the standard-treatment group, corresponding to a hazard ratio of 0.79. The incidence of serious adverse events was similar in the treatment groups, but symptomatic hypotension and hyperkalemia occurred more frequently in the intensive-treatment group.

This trial demonstrates several key features of Phase III research: large sample sizes, multi-site coordination, long follow-up periods, composite endpoints that capture clinically relevant outcomes, and careful monitoring of both benefits and harms.

Pragmatic and Event-Driven Trial Designs

Not all Phase III trials follow the traditional explanatory model. Pragmatic trials are designed to evaluate interventions under real-world conditions, with broader inclusion criteria and less intensive monitoring than explanatory trials. The Renal Lifecycle trial is a pragmatic, international, multicentre, investigator-initiated, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial planned to enroll approximately 1500 patients with severely impaired kidney function, on dialysis, or after kidney transplant. The trial is event driven, meaning it will end after 468 first primary endpoint events have occurred, with a power of 80% and an alpha of 0.05 to detect a 25% relative risk reduction assuming an annual 12.5% incidence of the primary outcome.

Event-driven designs allow trials to continue until sufficient outcome events have accumulated to provide adequate statistical power, instead of stopping at a fixed calendar date. This approach is particularly useful for trials in chronic diseases where outcomes accrue slowly over time.

Regulatory Review and Approval

After successful completion of Phase III trials, the sponsor compiles all preclinical and clinical data into a marketing application for submission to regulatory authorities. The FDA and EMA review the evidence to determine whether the treatment's benefits outweigh its risks for the proposed indication. This review process includes an assessment of the quality of the manufacturing process, the adequacy of the clinical data, and the proposed labeling.

Special market authorizations are available for certain situations. Conditional approval may be granted for urgently required drugs, as seen with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir for the treatment of COVID-19. Authorization under exceptional circumstances may be granted when comprehensive data cannot be provided, as seen with tecovirimat for pox viruses. These pathways allow patients to access promising treatments before all traditional evidence requirements are met, with the expectation that additional data will be generated after approval.

Phase IV and Post-Marketing Surveillance

The clinical trial lifecycle does not end with regulatory approval. Phase IV studies and post-marketing surveillance continue to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of treatments in real-world populations. These activities can detect rare adverse events that were not observed in pre-approval trials, identify drug interactions that emerge with broader use, and assess long-term outcomes that extend beyond the follow-up period of the pivotal trials.

Post-marketing surveillance relies on multiple data sources, including spontaneous adverse event reporting, electronic health records, claims databases, and patient registries. The integration of these data sources allows regulators and manufacturers to monitor the benefit-risk profile of approved products on an ongoing basis.

Real-World Evidence and Continuous Learning

The concept of continuous learning across the clinical evidence lifecycle has gained attention as a way to accelerate the generation and application of real-world evidence. Systems that support continuous learning can integrate data from clinical trials, electronic health records, and other sources to generate evidence more efficiently than traditional standalone studies. These approaches hold promise for improving the speed and relevance of evidence generation throughout the product lifecycle.

Artificial Intelligence Across the Trial Lifecycle

Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly being used to support clinical research across the trial lifecycle. Clinical trials face significant challenges including recruitment delays affecting a large proportion of studies, escalating costs, success rates below 12%, and data quality issues affecting a substantial portion of datasets. AI offers potential solutions to address these systemic inefficiencies.

Evidence is strongest for operational uses of AI, particularly recruitment, eligibility screening, trial matching, and risk-based monitoring. Applications to immune-response interpretation, correlates of protection, and vaccine safety surveillance are promising but remain less prospectively validated. Responsible adoption should be guided by intended tool use, evidence of strength, data governance, regulatory expectations, and preservation of human scientific and safety judgment.

In vaccine trials specifically, AI applications must account for distinctive challenges including high safety expectations in healthy participants, evolving pathogen exposure and baseline immunity, incomplete correlates of protection, applicability of findings to intended-use populations, and intense public scrutiny. The value of AI in this context requires careful evidence-based assessment instead of assumption.

Practical Implementation: Managing a Trial Through Its Lifecycle

Managing a clinical trial through its lifecycle requires systematic attention to protocol development, regulatory submissions, site selection, patient recruitment, data collection, monitoring, and reporting. The following steps provide a practical framework for trial management.

Step 1: Define the Research Question and Objectives

The first step in any clinical trial is to define the research question precisely. What population will be studied? What intervention will be tested? What comparator will be used? What outcomes will be measured? The answers to these questions determine the trial design, sample size, and statistical analysis plan.

Step 2: Design the Trial and Write the Protocol

The trial protocol is the operational document that governs all aspects of the study. It describes the scientific rationale, objectives, design, methodology, statistical considerations, and organizational structure of the trial. The protocol must be written with sufficient detail that any qualified investigator could conduct the trial in the same way.

Step 3: Obtain Regulatory and Ethics Approval

Before a trial can begin, it must receive approval from regulatory authorities and an institutional review board or ethics committee. The regulatory submission includes preclinical data, the trial protocol, investigator qualifications, and informed consent materials. Ethics review focuses on the protection of human subjects, including the risk-benefit ratio, informed consent process, and provisions for vulnerable populations.

Step 4: Register the Trial and Set Up Infrastructure

Clinical trials should be registered in a public registry such as ClinicalTrials.gov before enrollment begins. Trial infrastructure includes the case report form system, data management procedures, safety monitoring plan, and quality assurance processes. Site selection and initiation ensure that each participating site has the resources and trained personnel to conduct the trial according to protocol.

Step 5: Recruit and Enroll Participants

Patient recruitment is one of the most challenging aspects of clinical trial conduct. Recruitment delays affect a large proportion of studies, and effective recruitment strategies are essential for completing trials on time and within budget. Eligibility screening ensures that enrolled participants meet the protocol's inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Step 6: Conduct the Trial and Monitor Safety

During trial conduct, data are collected according to the protocol and monitored for quality and completeness. Safety monitoring includes the collection and reporting of adverse events, periodic safety reviews, and the operation of a data safety monitoring board for trials with significant safety concerns or large sample sizes.

Step 7: Analyze the Data and Report Results

After the trial reaches its planned end, the data are locked and analyzed according to the pre-specified statistical analysis plan. Results are reported in peer-reviewed publications and to regulatory authorities. The reporting of trial results should be complete and transparent, including negative and null findings.

Step 8: Continue Post-Marketing Surveillance

For approved products, post-marketing surveillance continues to monitor safety and effectiveness in real-world populations. Manufacturers are required to report serious adverse events to regulators, and additional studies may be required as a condition of approval.

Records and Measurements Across the Lifecycle

Accurate record keeping is essential at every stage of the clinical trial lifecycle. The following records should be maintained and preserved according to applicable regulations and guidelines.

Common Failure Patterns in the Trial Lifecycle

Understanding common failure patterns can help researchers anticipate and avoid problems in their own trials. The following patterns are frequently observed across the clinical trial lifecycle.

Recruitment Failure

Recruitment delays affect a large proportion of clinical trials. Common causes include overly restrictive eligibility criteria, limited patient populations, competing trials, and inadequate recruitment planning. Mitigation strategies include engaging patient advocacy groups, using electronic health records to identify potential participants, and considering pragmatic trial designs with broader inclusion criteria.

Poor Data Quality

Data quality issues affect a substantial portion of datasets in clinical trials. Common problems include missing data, inconsistent coding, out-of-range values, and protocol deviations. Mitigation strategies include robust data management procedures, risk-based monitoring, and regular data quality reviews.

Inadequate Safety Monitoring

Failure to detect or report adverse events can compromise participant safety and trial integrity. Common problems include under-reporting of adverse events, delayed reporting of serious adverse events, and inadequate follow-up of participants who discontinue treatment. Mitigation strategies include comprehensive safety training, electronic adverse event capture, and independent safety monitoring.

Statistical Design Flaws

Statistical design flaws can render trial results uninterpretable. Common problems include inadequate sample size, inappropriate endpoints, failure to account for multiple comparisons, and post-hoc analyses that are not pre-specified. Mitigation strategies include consultation with biostatisticians during trial design, pre-specification of all analyses, and simulation studies to evaluate trial operating characteristics.

Translation Failure

Many interventions that show promise in preclinical studies fail to demonstrate benefit in human trials. Common causes include poor reproducibility of preclinical findings, species differences in drug metabolism or disease biology, and inadequate preclinical models. Mitigation strategies include multi-center preclinical trials, rigorous assay validation, and careful selection of animal models that reflect human disease.

Welfare and Safety Context

Participant safety is the paramount consideration throughout the clinical trial lifecycle. Every trial must have a plan for protecting participants from harm, including procedures for monitoring adverse events, stopping rules for unacceptable toxicity, and provisions for medical care in the event of trial-related injury.

The World Health Organization's Laboratory Biosafety Manual provides guidance on the safe handling of biological materials that may be encountered during clinical research. Investigators working with infectious agents or human-derived samples must follow appropriate biosafety practices to protect both research participants and laboratory personnel.

Patient education is an important component of the clinical trial lifecycle. Participants must understand the purpose of the trial, the procedures involved, the potential risks and benefits, and their rights as research subjects. Informed consent is an ongoing process, not a one-time event, and participants should be informed of new information that may affect their willingness to continue in the trial.

Limitations and Escalation Criteria

Every clinical trial has limitations that should be acknowledged when interpreting results. These limitations may include restricted generalizability due to narrow inclusion criteria, limited follow-up duration, or the use of surrogate endpoints instead of clinical outcomes. Researchers should be transparent about these limitations in publications and regulatory submissions.

Professional escalation is appropriate when certain conditions are observed during trial conduct. The following situations warrant immediate escalation to the principal investigator, data safety monitoring board, or regulatory authorities:

• Unexpected serious adverse events that may be related to the investigational treatment
• Evidence of harm that outweighs potential benefit
• Protocol violations that compromise participant safety or data integrity
• Fraud or scientific misconduct
• Early evidence of treatment efficacy or futility that may warrant stopping the trial

The zuranolone trial for postpartum depression illustrates the importance of careful safety monitoring in psychiatric trials. In this double-blind Phase 3 trial, women with severe postpartum depression were randomized to receive zuranolone 50 mg/day or placebo for 14 days. Treatment with zuranolone resulted in statistically significant improvement in depressive symptoms at day 15, with significant improvement also reported at days 3, 28, and 45. The most common adverse events with zuranolone were somnolence, dizziness, and sedation. No loss of consciousness, withdrawal symptoms, or increased suicidal ideation or behavior were observed. This trial demonstrates how comprehensive safety monitoring can provide reassurance about the benefit-risk profile of a new treatment.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the difference between preclinical and clinical trials?

Preclinical trials occur before any human testing and use laboratory models such as cell cultures and animals to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of an intervention. Clinical trials begin only after preclinical studies suggest the therapy is safe enough to test in humans. Clinical trials are conducted in sequential phases, each with specific objectives related to safety, efficacy, and dosing.

How long does the clinical trial lifecycle typically take?

The duration of the clinical trial lifecycle varies widely depending on the therapeutic area, the nature of the intervention, and the efficiency of trial conduct. The process from preclinical development through regulatory approval typically takes many years, and post-marketing surveillance continues indefinitely after approval. No single timeline applies to all products.

What is the purpose of Phase 0 trials?

Phase 0 trials involve the administration of microdoses to a small number of participants to generate preliminary pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic data. These studies help developers make early decisions about whether a compound has favorable drug-like properties in humans before committing to the larger and more expensive Phase I trials.

How are Phase II trials different from Phase III trials?

Phase II trials are designed to determine if a new treatment has sufficiently promising efficacy to warrant further investigation in a large-scale randomized Phase III trial, as well as to further assess safety. Phase II studies usually involve a few hundred patients. Phase III trials provide the definitive confirmatory evidence of efficacy and safety in larger populations and are the primary basis for regulatory approval decisions.

What happens after a drug is approved?

After regulatory approval, the product enters the post-marketing phase of the lifecycle. Phase IV studies and post-marketing surveillance continue to evaluate safety and effectiveness in real-world populations. These activities can detect rare adverse events, identify drug interactions, and assess long-term outcomes that were not observed in pre-approval trials.

How does artificial intelligence support clinical trials?

Artificial intelligence is used across the trial lifecycle for operational purposes including recruitment, eligibility screening, trial matching, and risk-based monitoring. Evidence is strongest for these operational uses. Applications to immune-response interpretation, correlates of protection, and vaccine safety surveillance are promising but remain less prospectively validated.

What are pragmatic clinical trials?

Pragmatic trials are designed to evaluate interventions under real-world conditions, with broader inclusion criteria and less intensive monitoring than traditional explanatory trials. The Renal Lifecycle trial is an example of a pragmatic trial that includes patients with severely impaired kidney function, patients on dialysis, and kidney transplant recipients who were excluded from earlier trials of SGLT2 inhibitors.

Why do some promising preclinical results fail to translate to humans?

Translation failure can occur for many reasons, including poor reproducibility of preclinical findings, species differences in drug metabolism or disease biology, and inadequate preclinical models. Multi-center preclinical trials, rigorous assay validation, and careful selection of animal models can help reduce the risk of advancing compounds that will ultimately fail in humans.

Related Articles

• Multiplex Real-Time RT-PCR for Differential Diagnosis of Canine Infectious Respiratory Disease Complex (CIRDC): Panel Design, Validation, and Clinical Utility
• High-Resolution Melting Analysis (HRMA) for Rapid Genotyping of Canine Distemper Virus Strains in Clinical Samples
• Multiplex RT-qPCR for Differential Diagnosis of Canine Respiratory Pathogens: Panel Design, Analytical Sensitivity, and Clinical Application
• Digital Droplet PCR (ddPCR) for Absolute Quantification of Swine Enteric Coronaviruses in Fecal and Oral Fluid Samples: Analytical Sensitivity and Clinical Utility
• Multiplex Real-Time RT-PCR Detection of Canine Respiratory Pathogens Including Canine Distemper Virus, Bordetella bronchiseptica, and H3N8 Influenza: Analytical Sensitivity and Clinical Validation in Nasal Swabs

References and Further Reading

• Laboratory Quality Management System Handbook. World Health Organization.
• Laboratory Biosafety Manual. World Health Organization.
• Assay Guidance Manual. National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences.
• Bioanalytical Method Validation Guidance. U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
• NCBI Literature Resources. National Center for Biotechnology Information.
• PubMed. National Library of Medicine.
• Zuranolone for the Treatment of Postpartum Depression.. The American journal of psychiatry, 2023.
• Intensive Blood-Pressure Control in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes.. The New England journal of medicine, 2025.
• Rationale and design of the Renal Lifecycle trial assessing the effect of dapagliflozin on cardiorenal outcomes in severe chronic kidney disease.. Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association, 2025.
• Key recommendations for primary care from the 2022 Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) update.. NPJ primary care respiratory medicine, 2023.
• Artificial intelligence in clinical trials: A comprehensive review of opportunities, challenges, and future directions.. International journal of medical informatics, 2026.
• Berberine and Adiposity in Diabetes-Free Individuals With Obesity and MASLD: A Randomized Clinical Trial.. JAMA network open, 2026.
• Effectiveness of low-load resistance training with blood flow restriction vs. conventional high-intensity resistance training in older people diagnosed with sarcopenia: a randomized controlled trial.. Scientific reports, 2024.
• Artificial Intelligence Across the Vaccine Clinical Trial Lifecycle: Evidence, Readiness, and Guardrails.. Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, 2026.
• A new module in the drug development process: preclinical multi-center randomized controlled trial of R-ketamine on alcohol relapse.. 2025.
• Preclinical and clinical studies in the drug development process of European Medicines Agency-approved non-HIV antiviral agents: a narrative review.. 2025.
• Preclinical Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Studies and Clinical Trials in the Drug Development Process of EMA-Approved Antifungal Agents: A Review.. 2024.
• Looking ahead in early-phase trial design to improve the drug development process: examples in oncology.. 2023.
• A Review of Virus-Like Particle-Based SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines in Clinical Trial Phases. Iranian journal of pharmaceutical research, 2022.
• Clinical Trial Phases. 2017.
• Clinical Trial Phases. 2014.
• An Overview of Phase II Clinical Trial Designs. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics, 2021.
• Blockchain Smart Contracts for Automating Clinical Trials: Systematic Review and Proposed System Architecture. Jmir Medical Informatics, 2026.
• The role of artificial intelligence and machine learning in clinical trials. Artificial Intelligence for Drug Product Lifecycle Applications, 2024.
• CLEAR: A vision to support clinical evidence lifecycle with continuous learning. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 2025.
• Patient education in clinical trials and throughout the product lifecycle. Medical Writing, 2016.

This article is educational and does not replace institutional policy, professional advice, or applicable safety and regulatory requirements.