THE ILLUSION OF COMPLIANCE: WHY ECOA-ONLY MONITORING FALLS SHORT IN DETECTING AND ADDRESSING DATA GAPS

Author(s)

Lindsay Hughes, PhD1, Christy Hoey2, Erik Degelman, BS3;
1IQVIA, Parsippany, NJ, USA, 2IQVIA, Scientific Manager, Durham, NC, USA, 3IQVIA, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
OBJECTIVES: Compliance monitoring in clinical trials often relies solely on electronic Clinical Outcome Assessment (eCOA) platforms; yet these represent only one component of a broader evidence ecosystem that includes Electronic Data Capture (EDC), laboratory systems, and Interactive Response Technology (IRT). Evaluating compliance in isolation can mask incongruencies, risking endpoint reliability, data completeness, and regulatory review. These gaps may remain undetected until database lock, compromising trial integrity.
This study aims to evaluate the limitations of eCOA-only compliance monitoring and identify cross-system data discrepancies across five studies spanning oncology (n=2), vaccines (n=1), autoimmune (n=1), and gastroenterology (n=1).
METHODS: Aligned datasets from eCOA, EDC, IRT, and other platforms were reviewed. Discrepancies included visit date mismatches (>1 day), missing assessments (scheduled but absent in one or more system), timing misalignments (outside protocol visit windows), and operational inconsistencies (e.g., dosing occurring after eCOA-assessment when same-day required). Metrics were calculated per 100 subject visits and impact assessed via endpoint missingness. Data were sourced from the IQVIA Patient Centered Solutions - Implementation (PCSI) monitoring activities.
RESULTS: Cross-system alignment revealed discrepancies invisible in eCOA alone: 5-15% of visits showed date mismatches; 8-15% of assessments were recorded in eCOA but absent in EDC; 8-11% of assessments that were marked as on time in eCOA violated the protocol-specified windows when matched to EDC dates. Lab data exposed delayed sample collections contradicting eCOA visit timing. Additional granular analyses will be discussed in presentation of this abstract, if accepted.
CONCLUSIONS: Findings demonstrate that eCOA-only monitoring can materially overestimate compliance. Integrated, cross-system monitoring enables detection of gaps earlier, strengthens endpoint validity, and aligns with regulatory expectations for comprehensive oversight.

Conference/Value in Health Info

2026-05, ISPOR 2026, Philadelphia, PA, USA

Value in Health, Volume 29, Issue S6

Code

CO58

Topic

Clinical Outcomes

Topic Subcategory

Clinical Outcomes Assessment

Disease

SDC: Gastrointestinal Disorders, SDC: Oncology, SDC: Systemic Disorders/Conditions (Anesthesia, Auto-Immune Disorders (n.e.c.), Hematological Disorders (non-oncologic), Pain), STA: Multiple/Other Specialized Treatments, STA: Vaccines

Your browser is out-of-date

ISPOR recommends that you update your browser for more security, speed and the best experience on ispor.org. Update my browser now

×