Typically, we deploy infrastructure to new clients and deliver production data in the UI within weeks from contracting

Yes, we routinely deploy during ongoing studies.

We’ve purpose-built the QuartzBio platform with the recognition and deep appreciation for the complexity and inconsistency of data. Our platform is source system- and format-agnostic. We do not enforce rigid data specifications that require vendors to change how they provide data.

With this in mind, we can also integrate data for studies that have already been completed.

The most common way that we engage with vendors is being added as a third party to an existing data transfer agreement between the vendor and the sponsor. We also frequently receive data uploads directly to the platform from sponsor teams.

We have the capability to integrate with APIs, though vendors don’t always have them available. With our breadth of experience, teams are often pleased to learn that QuartzBio is already working with their vendors.

QuartzBio is also flexible and open to aligning with existing processes and capabilities that sponsors have in place.

Yes. Not only can the platform integrate data across multiple studies, but it can also integrate historical data and publicly available datasets.

The key to this capability is indexing of files, mapping to a common data dictionary as well as ontology engines. QuartzBio’s technology has been optimized to leverage a smart or learning mapping engine to do this efficiently, at scale, and to learn over time.

Data is refreshed on an ongoing basis as results data becomes available. Frequency is largely dependent on the needs of the client/sponsor.

No, it’s not necessary to wait until database lock. With the vSIM solution, data are integrated continuously throughout the life of a study. This approach is designed to be implemented before database lock, and discrepancies are highlighted as data is refreshed.

When updates are made in the source system, the discrepancies will be automatically resolved in the platform. With this approach, everyone on the sponsor and CRO teams can work from a common single source of truth – and they can confirm that source systems are updated appropriately. This dramatically reduces the burden of tracking discrepancies. ​

Reconciliation efforts typically have large gaps for sample information that is critical for sponsor teams. These gaps are often related to central labs being focused on reconciling samples they receive back to the requisition form or EDC.  Gaps in this process include the ability to report in a timely manner on missed collections, unexpected samples, and the status of samples and derivatives as they move onto third-party testing labs. ​

In order to create a holistic view of samples on-study, QuartzBio pulls information together from the EDC, and each lab and biorepository. We also incorporate the sample schedule from the protocol, including changes to the protocol as new patients are enrolled and as the protocol is amended.​

The answer is, universally, yes. Our team has deployed this solution on hundreds of studies, and this solution is not limited to a specific list of vendors. We have experience with inventory data from most of the active CROs, EDCs, central labs, and specialty vendors – this even includes data from academic labs, which can be particularly challenging.​

Central to our approach is that our team and solutions are flexible. If your trial involves a vendor we haven’t worked with before, it is straightforward to set up a data ingestion pipeline for a new data source. This is a process that takes weeks, not years, so it can be deployed even on active studies.