™
In most clinical trials:
As many as 30-60% participants are biological non-responders
Plus, the placebo response misrepresents the outcomes
Plus, heterogeneous enrolment further dilutes the effect size
A larger sample size is required to compensate for poor selection criteria
Result: $$$ spent, with no returns
You are not short of innovation.
You are testing it on the wrong biology.
Precision Recruitment
Align ingredient MOA with human biology (Phenotype)
Reduce heterogeneity at entry
Improve responder probability
Adaptive Trial Design
Interim data-driven optimization
Align with emerging response trend
Reduce failure risk during trial
Responder-Enriched Design
Run-in based responder selection
Maximize true biological signal
Exclude non-responders
We don’t improve your ingredient.
We improve the biology you test it on.
Traditional Model
(High Risk – Compromised Signal)
Heterogeneous Participant Pool
Broad Inclusion / Exclusion
Symptom-Based Screening
Biological Variability
Diluted Effect Size
Low Responder Density
Reduced Probability of Statistical Significance
(Controlled Risk – Optimized Signal)
Product-Target MOA Mapping
Defined Responder Biology
Phenotype-Enriched Pre-screening/ Screening
Reduced Biological Variability
Run-in Period (Early Response Assessment)
Responder Enrichment (Responder-Only Selection)
Precision Randomization
Contact us to know more
Adaptive Interim Analysis (Pre-defined Checkpoints)
Sample Size / Endpoint Optimization
Increased Responder Density
Higher Effect Size & Signal Clarity
Higher Probability of Statistically Significant Outcomes
