Commentary|Videos|July 31, 2024

Current Uses of LLMs in Clinical Trials

In part 1 of this video interview, Rama Kondru, PhD, CEO of Veridix AI discusses challenges with adoption and the potential uses of large language models in clinical trials.

ACT: What is the current state of the use of large language models (LLMs) in clinical trials?

Kondru: I think there is a lot of interest in LLMs in clinical trials. However, we see adoption has been low due to privacy and security concerns. It's a regulated environment, as we all know, and the second one is the specialized expertise to implement AI (artificial intelligence) solutions within the clinical landscape has also been limited in many organizations. That's one of the barriers for a lot of organizations to adopt LLMs within the clinical space. As you know, the adoption has been slow, but what we have been doing is to take decades of experience in using neural networks and semantics and so on—some of the specialty technologies—to implement a platform-wide approach, what we call the Veridix AI platform for clinical trials. Hopefully this will increase clinical acceleration, also clinical decentralization, which is giving access to more patients across the globe.

I see there is also a concern on ethical considerations and thinking about what is the impact of AI on participants, patients, and so we have to be very cautious in terms of using some of these technologies. You have to fully leverage them, use them, but with the prudence that is necessary in every clinical trial, because it affects human health. The areas that I feel like really important—I talked about clinical acceleration and decentralization—things such as patient trial matching, clinical trial planning, and execution. We are seeing a lot of use cases that pop up in improved efficiency for all of us who are in life sciences to execute clinical trials across the globe, enhanced quality of the information that we put out. I also see there is an area that's growing quite rapidly, which is the therapeutic area specific LLM use. So be it in neuroscience, be it in ophthalmology, be it in vaccines, the needs are different for participants, and LLMs are coming to that risk, if you will, in addressing some of these compelling needs for clinical trials. So certainly, the two concepts to remember is you'll have a profound impact if adopted well in clinical acceleration and decentralization.


Related to this article

What the Epilepsy Community Has Taught Us About Trial Feasibility
In this video interview, Amélie Lothe, global medical community head for rare epilepsies at UCB Pharma, shares what she has learned firsthand from families living with Dravet syndrome and CDKL5 deficiency disorder about what makes trial participation possible—and what makes it not.
Why Seizure Counts Alone Can't Define Success in Epilepsy Trials
In this video interview, Amélie Lothe, global medical community head for rare epilepsies at UCB Pharma, explains why the full burden of developmental and epileptic encephalopathies extends far beyond clinical symptoms—and why endpoints must reflect what families are actually hoping for.
What It Actually Means to Embed the Patient Voice in Trial Design
In this video interview, Amélie Lothe, global medical community head for rare epilepsies at UCB Pharma, explains why genuine patient partnership begins before the protocol is written—and what it looks like when patients and caregivers tell you a trial was designed with them in mind.
What This Study Means for Sponsors Still Struggling to Justify RBQM at Scale
In this video interview, Sylviane de Viron of CluePoints and Abigail Dirks of Tufts CSDD explain how ICH E6(R3) and new empirical evidence of RBQM's net financial impact give sponsors the tools they need to build the multi-functional buy-in required for successful adoption—and why RBQM only delivers full value when it replaces, not supplements, traditional monitoring.