Introduction
In the critical landscape of pharmaceutical development, the transition from phase II (safety) to phase III (efficacy) is often described as the “valley of death”, with approximately 70% of drug development projects failing to progress further. Even for those who reach Phase III, the hurdle remains high, with 57% of failures attributed to inadequate efficacy and 17% to safety concerns. Clinical trial attrition has a paradigm influence over the risk of not only impacting the lives of patients but also the business strategy and market & investor sentiments for the company. The toll can be from risking few lives to billion dollars at the stake. Thus, the clinical attrition or negative trial results needs to be communicated with lots of responsibilities as well as strategic and effective way. What’s more important is learning and understanding the factors responsible for trial halt equipping the company for all future decisions.
Working as a pharmacist, I have observed the human face of these statistics, patients’ treatment journeys getting abruptly altered when a trial is halted. In these clinical attrition scenarios, the internal reaction often defaults to a defensive posture. However, for Field Medical Affairs, especially Medical Science Liaison (MSL), a trial failure should not be a scientific dead end but a critical pivot point. This is the moment when we transition from trial supporters to “Scientific Custodians” of the asset’s legacy and future by converting a setback into actionable scientific and operational intelligence. This article will outline a framework for moving from reactive scientific communication based on data-sharing to a proactive “Phoenix Strategy”, where MSLs can leverage specific communication tools like the clinical question spine and the claim ladder to understand the qualitative and quantitative factors behind trial failure and to preserve scientific equity and identify the next therapeutic frontier. This article will discuss the importance of early engagement, the art of distilling field insights into new indications, and examine the classic case of Valsartan as a model for successful lifecycle pivoting.
The Proactive Foundation: Building the Scientific Bridge
Managing negative trial outcomes begins long before the data is unblinded. The role of Medical Affairs is to serve as the interface between internal scientific activities and the external clinical communities. Early engagement during the feasibility stage is critical for understanding the site dynamics and establishing rapport. Further, capturing root-cause insights on feasibility, enrolment barriers, endpoint relevance, protocol complexity, and site performance. As a pharmacovigilance and clinical site associate, I observed that site engagement is the only preventive measure against the trial fatigue that often follows a negative result. By establishing ourselves as scientific partners, we ensure that when a trial stops, the bridge remains open for the mutual exchange of insights. In these scenarios, the approaches include the design and execution of a good clinical practice (GCP)- compliant, ethically sound clinical trial with statistically robust endpoints. MSLs who more often work as a support function for study awareness and site engagement before trial attrition. After attrition, they need to become more strategic in protecting scientific credibility, shaping the evidence-based post-mortem narrative, and informing go/no-go decisions for the next development step.
Tactical Compliance: The Clinical Question Spine and Claim Ladder
For Field Medical Affairs, the “how” of communication is as important as the “what”. To ensure interactions remain rigorous and non-promotional, MSLs can utilize the “Clinical Question Spine” to structure Key Opinion Leader (KOL) discussions. This framework anchors the conversation in the clinical problem and the study’s design intent, identifying gaps that could be addressed through new studies, protocol redesign, or real-world evidence.
When communicating negative data, MSLs must adhere to a Claim Ladder to categorize information:
- Observed Data: The raw, unembellished primary findings (e.g., mean changes in endpoints).
- Supported Inferences: Conclusions strictly allowed by the trial’s powering and randomization.
- Hypothesized Trends: Patterns seen in post-hoc or subgroup analyses, which must be explicitly labeled as exploratory or hypothesis-generating.
- Unknowns/Limitations: Precise boundary-setting to prevent over-generalization
Using boundary phrases, such as “While that is an important clinical observation, our current data set does not allow for a definitive conclusion”, is a best practice that differentiates a Strategic Advisor from a commercial messenger.
The MSL as a Repositioning Engine: The Valsartan Model
Pharmaceutical drugs under clinical phases often possess more than one indication, which is otherwise very rare. Medical Affairs, especially field-based, plays a vital role in understanding this through scientific exchanges, distilling them into actionable insights that can inform future study design, RWE planning, and even evidence reframing. Bringing them back and disseminating them to internal stakeholders, such as clinical operations and R&D teams, to drive internal brainstorming and development of strategies for novel therapeutic indications. The Medical Affairs department can then design and conduct clinical trials across identified therapeutic indications. Further, the medical affairs department can conduct conventional phase IIIb clinical trials to seek new indications. Another approach could be to conduct the necessary clinical development and seek approval to promote features and benefits vs. risks supported by newer clinical data, with or without requesting a change to the registered label use.
The history of Valsartan illustrates this pivot perfectly. By identifying scientific gaps through field insights, MA transitioned the asset from a crowded hypertension market to high-risk post-myocardial infarction (MI) and heart failure indications. This pivot, supported by mega-trials like VALIANT, was only possible because MSLs effectively distilled KOL views into actionable internal strategies for novel therapeutic indications.
Future-Proofing: Predictive AI and Human Expertise
As we outline the vision for Medical Affairs as a strategic pillar and patient-journey partner, the integration of AI has the potential to shift the MSL role from reactive to predictive when applied properly and in compliance. AI-enabled workflows will allow us to connect the dots across siloed data systems more rapidly. However, success in this landscape requires Human Expertise, the human-in-the-loop, to prevent hallucinations and maintain trust in complex therapeutic areas.
Conclusion: Scientific Custodianship
A clinical trial failure is the ultimate test of an MSL’s value. By viewing results reporting not as a legal hurdle but as an ethical obligation, we fulfil our mandate as scientific custodians. Through the disciplined use of communication frameworks and the strategic harvest of field insights, we ensure that every trial, regardless of its primary outcome, contributes to the lifecycle of medical progress.
References:
- Scavone C., et al. (2016). Disclosing negative trial results – procedure. Expert Rev. Clin. Pharmacol. 9, 1517–1519.
- Fogel D. (2018). Factors associated with clinical trials that fail and opportunities for improving the likelihood of success: A review. Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications vol. 11 156–164.
- Briel, M. et al. (2016). A systematic review of discontinued trials suggested that most reasons for recruitment failure were preventable. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology vol. 80 8–15.
- Patel D. et al. (2017). Phase 2 to phase 3 clinical trial transitions: Reasons for success and failure in immunologic diseases. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology vol. 140 685–687.
- Regadera Anechina L. et al (2025). The Evolution of In-Field Medical Affairs: Introducing the Strategic Scientific Advisor. Pharmaceut. Med. 39, 19–27.
- Galbraith, R. et al. (2025). Measuring the Impact of Scientific Communications to Drive Launch Excellence: A Data-Driven Framework for Medical Affairs. https://www.iqvia.com/library/white-papers/measuring-the-impact-of-scientific-communications-to-drive-launch-excellence.
- Beelke ME (2017). The evolving role of Medical Affairs: Opportunities for discovery, preclinical and clinical research. Journal for Clinical Studies 9, 3.
About the author:
Gaurav R. Pandey, PhD, MS (Pharm)
Gaurav is a pharmacist and an aspiring Medical Affairs professional with solid experience in translational bioscience and medicine. He is a recipient of the 2026 FSTP International MSL Fellowship from AMSLE-Emory University, USA, recognised for his dedication to advancing the MSL profession.
Gaurav’s scientific foundation is distinguished by a Pharmacy from the National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education & Research (NIPER) and an Indo-Australian Joint PhD (conferred Dec 2025), during which his research focused on theranostics and clinical diagnostics for immunology and inflammatory diseases. His field experience is extensive, including organizing 4 scientific symposia and collaborating with over 15 Key Opinion Leaders (KOLs) and 25 clinicians across the immunology, inflammation, and chronic disease sectors.
A passionate advocate for patient-centricity and the strategic lifecycle of innovative therapies, Gaurav is the founder of the Medical Affairs Discussion (MAD) community, a platform designed to drive dialogue on delivering strategic value to stakeholders. He currently serves as a Clinical Care Coordinator at Neurosensory, where he continues to bridge the gap between scientific innovation and patient-centric care.
Have an opinion on this article? Send a message to the editor.