Andrea Bastek , Amanda Zenere , Heather Manley , Camille Finkle , Chad Jaeger , Janet Matthews , Kristie Moffett , Megan Solomon , Paula Underhill
{"title":"Frontier sites in clinical trials: Opportunities, challenges, and models","authors":"Andrea Bastek , Amanda Zenere , Heather Manley , Camille Finkle , Chad Jaeger , Janet Matthews , Kristie Moffett , Megan Solomon , Paula Underhill","doi":"10.1016/j.conctc.2025.101581","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>The clinical trials industry faces a growing capacity gap driven by an increasing number of studies combined with site and staff shortages. The Site Enablement League (SEL) Task Force on Frontier Sites was established to explore the potential of non-traditional research sites—termed \"frontier sites\"—to address these issues by expanding access to underserved populations and embedding clinical research in community settings.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>The task force defined frontier sites and conducted a survey to gather perspectives on their benefits, challenges, and support needs. Twenty-nine valid survey responses were collected. Respondents self-identified as having direct experience with frontier sites (“experienced respondents”) or answered based on their perception of working with frontier sites (“perception respondents”). Free-text responses were coded into categories and analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Access to new participant populations was the most cited benefit, and experienced respondents noted additional gains in site engagement and education. Operational infrastructure deficiencies were the primary challenge identified by both experienced and perception respondents. Experienced respondents highlighted greater concerns about compliance and community resistance. The primary support need identified was enhanced operational support and quality oversight. Differences between experienced and perception respondent groups suggested the need for broader industry education.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Frontier sites offer significant promise for increasing research capacity and diversity, but require substantial operational, educational, and community engagement support. These survey findings provide a foundation for shared understanding across the industry. From that foundation the industry can work to develop a playbook to guide the successful integration of frontier sites into clinical trial operations.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":37937,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications","volume":"48 ","pages":"Article 101581"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2451865425001553","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/11/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
The clinical trials industry faces a growing capacity gap driven by an increasing number of studies combined with site and staff shortages. The Site Enablement League (SEL) Task Force on Frontier Sites was established to explore the potential of non-traditional research sites—termed "frontier sites"—to address these issues by expanding access to underserved populations and embedding clinical research in community settings.
Methods
The task force defined frontier sites and conducted a survey to gather perspectives on their benefits, challenges, and support needs. Twenty-nine valid survey responses were collected. Respondents self-identified as having direct experience with frontier sites (“experienced respondents”) or answered based on their perception of working with frontier sites (“perception respondents”). Free-text responses were coded into categories and analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively.
Results
Access to new participant populations was the most cited benefit, and experienced respondents noted additional gains in site engagement and education. Operational infrastructure deficiencies were the primary challenge identified by both experienced and perception respondents. Experienced respondents highlighted greater concerns about compliance and community resistance. The primary support need identified was enhanced operational support and quality oversight. Differences between experienced and perception respondent groups suggested the need for broader industry education.
Conclusion
Frontier sites offer significant promise for increasing research capacity and diversity, but require substantial operational, educational, and community engagement support. These survey findings provide a foundation for shared understanding across the industry. From that foundation the industry can work to develop a playbook to guide the successful integration of frontier sites into clinical trial operations.
期刊介绍:
Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications is an international peer reviewed open access journal that publishes articles pertaining to all aspects of clinical trials, including, but not limited to, design, conduct, analysis, regulation and ethics. Manuscripts submitted should appeal to a readership drawn from a wide range of disciplines including medicine, life science, pharmaceutical science, biostatistics, epidemiology, computer science, management science, behavioral science, and bioethics. Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications is unique in that it is outside the confines of disease specifications, and it strives to increase the transparency of medical research and reduce publication bias by publishing scientifically valid original research findings irrespective of their perceived importance, significance or impact. Both randomized and non-randomized trials are within the scope of the Journal. Some common topics include trial design rationale and methods, operational methodologies and challenges, and positive and negative trial results. In addition to original research, the Journal also welcomes other types of communications including, but are not limited to, methodology reviews, perspectives and discussions. Through timely dissemination of advances in clinical trials, the goal of Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications is to serve as a platform to enhance the communication and collaboration within the global clinical trials community that ultimately advances this field of research for the benefit of patients.