Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Automatically Labeling Clinical Trial Outcomes: A Large-Scale Benchmark for Drug Development

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2406.10292 v3 pith:LA5JZMDT submitted 2024-06-13 cs.AI cs.CLcs.LG

Automatically Labeling Clinical Trial Outcomes: A Large-Scale Benchmark for Drug Development

classification cs.AI cs.CLcs.LG
keywords trialclinicaloutcometrialsdruglabelsannotatedbenchmark
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Background The cost of drug discovery and development is substantial, with clinical trial outcomes playing a critical role in regulatory approval and patient care. However, access to large-scale, high-quality clinical trial outcome data remains limited, hindering advancements in predictive modeling and evidence-based decision-making. Methods We present the Clinical Trial Outcome (CTO) benchmark, a fully reproducible, large-scale repository encompassing approximately 125,000 drug and biologics trials. CTO integrates large language model (LLM) interpretations of publications, trial phase progression tracking, sentiment analysis from news sources, stock price movements of trial sponsors, and additional trial-related metrics. Furthermore, we manually annotated a dataset of clinical trials conducted between 2020 and 2024 to enhance the quality and reliability of outcome labels. Results The trial outcome labels in the CTO benchmark agree strongly with expert annotations, achieving an F1 score of 94 for Phase 3 trials and 91 across all phases. Additionally, benchmarking standard machine learning models on our manually annotated dataset revealed distribution shifts in recent trials, underscoring the necessity of continuously updated labeling approaches. Conclusions By analyzing CTO's performance on recent clinical trials, we demonstrate the ongoing need for high-quality, up-to-date trial outcome labels. We publicly release the CTO knowledge base and annotated labels at https://chufangao.github.io/CTOD, with regular updates to support research on clinical trial outcomes and inform data-driven improvements in drug development.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. $\texttt{AMEND++}$: Benchmarking Eligibility Criteria Amendments in Clinical Trials

    cs.CL 2026-01 conditional novelty 6.0

    Initial eligibility-criteria text is weakly predictive of later protocol amendments, and a change-aware masked-language-modeling pretraining step improves prediction by about 1.4% relative AUROC.

  2. DeepImagine: Learning Biomedical Reasoning via Successive Counterfactual Imagining

    cs.CL 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    DeepImagine trains LLMs on counterfactual pairs from clinical trials using supervised fine-tuning and reinforcement learning to improve outcome prediction by approximating causal mechanisms.