SCOPE, February 2019

1. SCOPE, February 2019 Transforming Data Quality Using Machine Learning

2. Vice President, Product Clinical Trial Management Medidata Solutions Stacey Yount

3. Objectives • Assess current state data quality oversight efficiency and effectiveness • Demonstrate why machine learning provides opportunities for transformation • Review case studies that highlight the impact of ML in the data review cycle

4. Data Feeds Are Complex And Increasing CTMS Mobile health BUDGETING Biomarkers LIMS CTMS EHR/ EMR SDR ePRO PROTOCOL DESIGN WEB SERVICES Labs SAFETY PAYMENTS Listings SAS extracts IMAGING EDC IRT CODING SENSORS eDiaries BATCH UPLOAD APPS SQM Claims

5. Icon optional. Processes and Technology Study Milestones Investigator Sites Inefficient edit checks and manual data review with 7.3% of submissions failing 1st attempt due to data issues Database locks averaging between 30+ days due to issues uncovered late in study lifecycle Increased frustration by sites and clinical teams with increased queries near database lock Organizational Value Employee Engagement Concerns voiced by Statistics organizations regarding cleanliness of data and use of Stats resources for cleaning Negative perception due to inefficient processes, impact to study milestones, and lack of insights prior to final reviews

6. Shadow settings on screenshot: size 100%, blur 5pt, distance 0pt, transparency 70% . Centralized Statistical Analytics • Known and unknown risk discovery through the use of statistical, machine learning analytics • Data quality and site performance • Single place to ensure logical and statistical data quality across all of your “monitoring” functions Study Day of Resection Study Day of Diagnosis

7. Data Management Reimagined Robust Edit Checks & Standards Integrated Quality & Risk Management Process Risk Oversight Team CSA Reviews Earlier Stats Reviews Risk Evaluation Outcome Risk Communication Pathway

8. Technology Enabled Convergence RBM and advanced analytics create opportunities for operational convergence

9. Hurdles • Learning curve with new technology • Significant as-is to-be differences in processes • Lack of industry best practices • Misalignment with current skill set

10. Best Practices • Design a new process instead of changing an existing process • Adjust implementation to account for organizational plans (e.g., size, structural changes) • Gain cross-functional alignment to process and tech changes • Leverage a team approach to oversight of data quality and site performance management

11. CSA Case Studies

12. Image: • Sent to Back • Adjust image transparency to make text readable Transformation 5 day database locks

13. Image: • Sent to Back • Adjust regangle shape transparency to make text readable >25% of data quality issues found across recent studies had potential to delay drug approval

14. Medidata CSA impact on submission Sponsor A Q1’ 18 Launch FDA Approval Remediation Extra analyses Centralized Statistical Analytics Sponsor B Remediation FDA Letter Extra analyses Delay

15. Supplement

16. Illustration “My medical record says my systolic BP was 180 in Jan 2017.” Is this right or wrong? What can you use from my medical record to help answer the question?

17. Illustration My medical record says my systolic BP was 180 in Jan 2017. Is this right or wrong? What can you use from my medical record to help answer the question? • Systolic BP before/after • Diastolic BP measurement • Medical history or hypertension • Concurrent hypertension adverse event reported • Con Med Hypertension Drug • Risk Factors (Age/Sex/etc.) After reviewing all of my data, could you answer the question with reasonable confidence?

18. Illustration How could we use medical records of people with characteristics similar to mine and give an even more accurate, quantitative answer to whether the Systolic BP is an error?

19. Illustration How could we use medical records of people like me with the list we came up with and give an even more accurate, quantitative answer to whether the Systolic BP is an error? • Normal variation of Systolic BP • Slope of Systolic BP vs. Diastolic BP relationship • Ranking of risk factors for relationship to Systolic BP Bottom Line: You can calculate the likelihood of data being wrong with higher confidence

20. Current data review practices lead to inefficiency and sub-optimal data quality

21. Most common quality issues uncovered with statistical data cleaning Site inconsistency for unknown risks Site inconsistency for known risks Differences in adverse event reporting Inconsistencies in how sites evaluate or measure endpoints Inconsistencies in how sites follow the protocol Differences in the actions sites take with regard to an adverse event Potential misconduct Data inconsistency Sites that make up data out of neglect or forgetfulness Data that are impossible or highly unlikely due to data entry errors

22. Iterative value of process • Risk Oversight Team provides cross-functional governance over data quality and site performance • Technology-enabled process optimization provides early insights • Iterative process provides feedback and insights into IQRM and oversight • Risk Communication Pathways ensure clear understanding of risk

23. Icon optional. Mid-sized sponsor transforms clinical data management using Medidata CSA Processes and Technology Efficient iterative processes supported by ML-based technology; nearly doubling number of database locks YOY Study Milestones Database locks average 5 days for critical studies and 10 days for others with significantly fewer findings after LPLV Investigator Sites Improved sites, clinical team communications and involvement in review cycles; excited to participate in study milestones Organizational Value Statistics findings 0 to <2%; Positive organizational satisfaction CDM Job Satisfaction Empowered through early insights with increased confidence in data quality and completeness = high job satisfaction and retention