Brief · Use case · Clinical Operations
Competing Trials Scan.
LiveScanTake stock of recruiting Phase 2 and 3 trials in moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis in the US and Europe, grouped by mechanism, with the registry search described.
Competing Trials Scan is a ready-made use case for Clinical Operations. It ships under the Scan template.
For clinical operations and development leads checking the competitive field around a trial. You get the registry method first, each trial with its category and maturity, how the field divides and what was out of scope. Entries are cited to the registry or marked as gaps.
Add it to your library to reuse from New → From template. Edit the saved copy in your library on the service form.
The decision
Which Phase 2 and Phase 3 interventional trials are currently recruiting for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis in the United States and Europe?
What is scanned
Trials are registered in more than one place and the registers do not hold the same records. The scan names each register it searched and says how it merged them.
| Source | What it holds | What the scan does with it |
|---|---|---|
| ClinicalTrials.gov | The US registry of clinical studies, which holds registration and results information and publishes data element definitions for sponsors.1 | Searched on a stated date with stated terms, then filtered to recruiting Phase 2 and Phase 3 interventional trials. |
| The EU Clinical Trials Information System | The EMA-maintained system under the Clinical Trials Regulation, whose public site went live on 31 January 2022. Anyone can search it by condition, sponsor, product and status.2,3 | Searched on the same date. One search returns a limited number of results, so the scan splits its searches and says how. |
| The legacy EU register | Trials started under the earlier directive are held in a separate EU register, and sources differ on the cutoff date.2 | Searched only if the question needs older trials, and the cutoff is stated. |
What the scan does
The same trial in two registers. A trial can appear in both ClinicalTrials.gov and the EU system. The scan merges them into one row and says how it matched them, so a trial is not counted twice.1,2
Search limits, stated. The EU public site limits how many results one search returns, as EMA’s training FAQ describes. The scan reports the limit it met, how it split the search, and the date.3
Recruiting is a status, not a fact about the future. A trial recruiting on the scan date may stop. The scan lists the status with its date and notes that it will age.
How it was run. The Comprehensive scan reports the registers, the terms, the date and how many records were found against how many were kept.
Recommended length
Comprehensive
Two registers are merged and searched under limits, so the method has to be auditable. Comprehensive adds the account of how the scan was run and what stands out.
You can pick another length on the form. The other two stay available.
Assumptions the scan checks
The scan states the assumptions its boundary and its sources rest on, and the closing section says what they leave out. Examples for this subject:
- The search terms for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis capture the trials, including those that describe severity differently.
- The registers are current on the scan date.
- A trial listed as recruiting in a register is recruiting.
Standards, guidance and sources
Registers
The decision practice behind the memo itself is on the template page.
What gets flagged
Any trial found in one register and not the other, any search that hit a result limit, and any trial whose status could not be confirmed on the scan date.
What arrives
- Scope and boundary
- How the scan was run
- What is out there
- How the field divides
- What stands out
- What this does not cover
What it will not do
It does not rank or score the items it finds, and it does not recommend one. A scan lists what exists; when you need a view on it, run a Comparison or a Decision Memo on the items you choose.
It does not assess which trial is most likely to succeed, and it does not name sponsors’ plans that are not in the registers.
It does not rank or score the items. A scan says what exists; it does not say which item is preferable.
It is a snapshot of one date. It does not monitor the field after that date.
It lists what it could find in the sources it names. Items in sources it could not open are listed as not covered.
References
- [1] U.S. National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov. Only the page title and the glossary were visible from our tools; the description of the registry is from the registry’s own public descriptions.
- [2] European Medicines Agency. Clinical Trials Information System (CTIS). Known from the page listing and search excerpts: public site live 31 January 2022; revised transparency rules from 18 June 2024.
- [3] European Medicines Agency. CTIS public site: search tips and guidance. The results limit is described in EMA’s training FAQ for a preliminary version of the system; check the current limit.
Links checked 9 October 2026
These are the sources the template drew on. None of their authors or issuers has reviewed it.
About the Brief service
A Brief is a written answer from one specialist, at the depth you asked for. It arrives with its sources, and it closes by saying plainly what would change the conclusion. Nothing is hidden behind a summary, and anything the expert could not source is marked as a gap rather than filled in.
To edit a saved template, open New → Brief → From template, or the library rail on the service form.