No Protocol Analyzed

Enter and analyze a protocol first to see the dashboard.

Analyze Protocol
Active Protocol

Auto-saved to your account Loaded from saved
Phase
Blinding
Patients
Similar Trials
Risk Score
Claude Sonnet
Input tokens:
Output tokens:
Cost:
OpenAI Embeddings
Tokens:
Cost:
Total Analysis
API Calls:
Total tokens:
Total Cost:

My Saved Analyses

+ more
Overall Risk
Based on similar trials analysis
Amendment Probability
Likelihood of at least one amendment · predicted amendments:
Protocol Complexity
Similar Trial Success
Completion rate in similar trials

Critical Warnings

Competitive Landscape

Similar Trials
Competing (Recruiting)
Competition Level

Enrollment Forecast

Target
Est. Duration (Base)
Benchmark

Site Strategy

Recommended Sites
Countries
Pts/Site Target

Additional Recommendations

Protocol Strengths

Detected Therapeutic Area:
Total Matched: Showing:
Mechanism of Action Breakdown

Competitive Assessment

Key Implications

Competitor Analysis

Enrollment Competition Analysis

Competing Trials
Competition Intensity
Timeline Impact

Geographic Hotspots

Underserved Regions

Mitigation Strategies

Differentiation Analysis

Your Unique Factors

Potential Disadvantages

Strategic Recommendations

Top Sponsors in Similar Trials

Organizations leading the most similar trials in this therapeutic area

Sponsor analysis based on similar trials not yet available.

Competitive Monitoring Plan

Key Competitors to Watch

Key Milestones to Track

Recommended Frequency:
No trials match your filter criteria.
Amendment Risk Score
Complexity Score
Similar Trial Success
Trials Analyzed

Design vs. Successful Trials

Design aspect Yours Similar trials

No design comparison available for this analysis.

Top Amendment Risk Drivers

No specific amendment drivers identified.

Terminated Trials

No terminated trials in similar set - positive indicator

Protocol Complexity Analysis

Complexity Score

Complexity Factors

Design Strengths

Design Weaknesses

Success Prediction Analysis

Predicted Success
Phase Benchmark
TA Benchmark
vs. Average

Key Success Drivers

Key Risk Drivers

Learnings from Terminated Trials

AI-Powered Recommendations

Protocol Eligibility Criteria

Complete structured criteria extracted from your protocol

Inclusion Criteria ()

None extracted

Exclusion Criteria ()

None extracted

Screen Failure Prediction

Predicted Ratio
Benchmark
Best in Class
Your Exclusions

Your Criteria vs Similar Trials

Criterion Your Value Similar Trials

No criterion benchmark available for this analysis.

Patient Pool Estimation

Global Estimate

Primary Screen Failure Drivers

Inclusion Criteria Assessment

Problematic Criteria

Exclusion Criteria Assessment

Problematic Criteria

Eligibility Optimization Recommendations

Your eligibility criteria are well-aligned with similar trials. No major optimization suggestions.

Special Populations Considerations

Elderly
Pediatric
Pregnancy
Comorbidities

Recommendations

Regulatory Alignment

FDA Guidance Alignment
EMA Requirements

Your Primary Endpoint

FDA Alignment:
EMA:

Primary Endpoint Analysis

Type
Measurement Complexity
Assessment Frequency
Overall Assessment

Strengths

Weaknesses

Regulatory Alignment Details

Relevant FDA Guidance

Precedent Approvals

Recommendations for Better Alignment

Primary Endpoint Types in Similar Trials

Historical Endpoint Benchmarking

Primary endpoints and reported results of the most similar historical trials, compared with your endpoint

Trials benchmarked
Met primary endpoint (where reported)
Typical effect size in the field
Your target vs. benchmark

Your endpoint vs. the field:

Trial Primary endpoint Reported effect Met primary Status

No similar historical trials were matched for this protocol, so there is nothing to benchmark against. Try lowering the minimum similarity score and re-running the analysis.

Trial records and status from ClinicalTrials.gov; reported effects and outcome flags are AI-summarised and should be confirmed against the source publication.

Enrollment Comparison with Similar Trials

Your Target
Similar Trial Mean
Median
Min
Max

Sample Size Scenarios

Scenario Control Rate Treatment Rate Effect Size N Needed Power

Statistical Assumptions

Alpha (Type I Error)
Statistical Power
Expected Dropout Rate
Analysis Method

Sample Size Insights

Your Target vs. Similar Trials

Recommendation

Interim Analysis

Sample Size Risks

Secondary Endpoints

All secondary endpoints extracted from your protocol, with the AI assessment for each

No secondary endpoints were found in the protocol text that was analyzed. If your protocol defines them, use Edit Analysis to add them and re-run the analysis.

Recommended Additional Endpoints

Endpoint Collection Burden Assessment

Patient Burden
Site Burden

Simplification Opportunities

Amendment Probability
Chance of at least one amendment
Amendment Risk Score
Predicted Amendments
Expected over the study
Industry Benchmark
Protocols with ≥1 amendment
Trials Analyzed

Risk Factors

Likely Amendment Areas

Amendment Impact Assessment

Historical Patterns from Similar Trials

Recommended Site Strategy

Recommended Sites
Countries
Pts/Site Target
Benchmark Avg
Activation

Key Strategic Considerations

Geographic Strategy

Primary Regions

Emerging Regions to Consider

Country Recommendations

Country Priority Sites Patients Cost Key Advantages

Must-Have Criteria

Preferred Criteria

Red Flags

Site Performance Benchmarks

Enrollment Rate
Screen Failure
Deviation Threshold
Query Rate
Retention Target

Activation Timeline Strategy

Risk Mitigation Strategy

Backup Sites Recommended
Contingency Countries

Early Warning Indicators

Top Countries in Similar Trials

Sites with Experience in Similar Trials

Budget Considerations

Cost-Effective Regions
High-Cost Regions

Cost Optimization Strategies

Timeline Projections

Target Enrollment: patients

Base Case Assumptions

What-If Timeline Impact

Month-by-Month Enrollment Projection

Projected new and cumulative enrollment for every month until the target of patients is reached ( months, scenario)

Month New Cumulative % of target

Enrollment Acceleration Recommendations

Actions that can shorten the enrollment timeline for this protocol

Scenario Simulator

Adjust sample size, sites, eligibility and competition to see the projected impact vs. your current plan

Target: patients
Sites:
Original Plan
Target enrollment
Sites
Timeline (base)
Monthly enrollment
Screens needed
Risk score
Simulated Scenario
Target enrollment
Sites
Timeline (base)
Monthly enrollment
Screens needed
Risk score
Simulation Recommendations

Enrollment Bottleneck Analysis

No specific enrollment bottlenecks were identified for this protocol.

Key Enrollment Risks

Enrollment Metrics

Pts/Site/Month
Recommended Sites
Screen Failure Rate
Site Activation

Probability × Impact Risk Matrix

Each identified risk positioned by likelihood and consequence

Low Impact
Medium Impact
High Impact
High Prob.
Med Prob.
Low Prob.
Risk Score

Probability Predictions

Termination Risk
Enrollment Delay (>6mo)
Amendment Required

Key Risk Indicators

Execution Risk
Based on protocol complexity
Competition Level
Recruiting competing trials
Feasibility Score
Likelihood of successful completion

Risk Matrix with Mitigations

Risk Factor Prob Impact Mitigation

Detailed Risk Category Analysis

Critical Watch Items

Risk Mitigation Priority Actions

Success Probability Analysis

Predicted Success
Phase Benchmark
Therapeutic Area Avg

Factors Increasing Success

Factors Decreasing Success

Regulatory Risk Assessment

No regulatory-specific risks were identified for this protocol.