Pistoia Alliance examines environmental impact of digital vs. traditional trials

A project comparing the carbon footprints of digital and traditional clinical trials will help sponsors and CROs design more sustainable studies, according to the Pistoia Alliance, a non-profit that promotes innovation in healthcare.

The project — which launched in March — will use data from drug companies and CROs to develop a way of evaluating the carbon footprint of digital trial technologies, including smartphones and tablets.

The healthcare sector accounts for approximately 5% of greenhouse gas emissions globally, with clinical trials generating around 100 million tonnes of carbon dioxide a year, according to Thierry Escudier, portfolio lead at the Alliance.

“Clinical trials are a significant contributor to healthcare’s carbon footprint, from travel emissions to single-use materials and energy-intensive trial sites. With growing pressure from governments, regulators, and patients to reduce this impact, the need for standardized measurement of the footprint of different trial components has become urgent because you can’t assess or reduce what you can’t measure,” he told Clinical Insider.

Digital difference?

Whether decentralized studies — in which digital technologies reduce or eliminate the need for site visits — generate more or less carbon dioxide than site-based studies is unclear as current measuring methods lack sophistication.

“We expect there to be some surprises and hidden carbon costs of digital infrastructure. For example, a ‘bring your own device’ model has a very different environmental footprint compared to provisioning and issuing additional smartphones or tablets to participants. These nuances can significantly affect a trial’s sustainability profile,” Escudier said.

The project comes just a few months after the Alliance, the Sustainable Healthcare Coalition, and industry-backed organization the Low Carbon Clinical Trials community launched the Clinical Trial Carbon Calculator, which is designed to standardize assessment of the environmental impact of drug research.

The work also reflects wider efforts to minimize the environmental impact of drug research, according to Escudier, who said, “While sustainability is not yet the primary driver in clinical trial design, it is becoming an increasingly important factor in sponsor and CRO decision-making.

“Until now, the adoption of more digitally enabled trials and decentralized clinical trials (DCTs) has largely been motivated by benefits such as improved patient experience and enhanced data quality. However, if DCTs are proven to be more sustainable than traditional models, this could add a compelling new incentive that aligns with growing pressure on the industry to meet sustainability targets.”

He added that over time, “we expect sustainability to play a bigger role, particularly as sponsors recognize that more sustainable trials can also support patient-centricity and operational efficiency.”

DepositPhotos/malpetr