Despite the meaningful progress made in drug development, the gender gap in healthcare remains a serious challenge.1 Research shows that women spend 25% more of their lives in poor health than men, with less access to equitable treatment and improved outcomes. Yet many therapeutic areas that affect women remain under-researched and underrepresented in clinical development.2 Consequently in 2024, the FDA’s Office of Women’s Health released an updated Research Roadmap, with one of its priorities being the selection and incorporation of appropriate clinical outcome assessments (COAs) and endpoints in studies designed for or inclusive of women.3
A review of the availability and application of COAs within the context of the FDA’s roadmap highlighted several patterns and gaps in how women’s health is currently evaluated across therapeutic areas.
An evaluation of the ePROVIDE platform from Mapi Research Trust, which references more than 8,000 COAs, label claims and regulatory recommendations on the use of COAs, identified 527 COAs relevant to women’s health, across 254 therapeutic indications. Of these, only 47 were originally developed in an all-female population. Despite long-standing recognition of women’s unique health needs, there are a limited number of COAs specifically tailored to addressing those needs. Of the 527 COAs available for women’s health, more than half were for neoplasms. Cardiovascular disease, musculoskeletal disorders, and psychological conditions were found to have the least number of COAs available. In fact, only 12 COAs were found for cardiovascular diseases, and just one corresponding product label in this area has been approved by the FDA to date.
These findings highlight a critical challenge for sponsors: the tools used to measure meaningful outcomes in women’s health are not yet sufficiently tailored to the needs of women. While patient-reported outcomes (PROs) remain the most common COAs developed in female populations, regulatory guidance rarely specifies female-centric tools. Among 21 total guidelines referencing COAs, including six from the FDA and five from the EMA, none of the recommended COAs were developed exclusively in female populations.
As regulators and patients call for more inclusive research, there is an increasing need and ability for sponsors to drive more relevant study design and execution, particularly when it comes to choosing endpoints, capturing patient experience, and demonstrating value to regulators and patients alike.
Sponsors pursuing innovation in women’s health need more than data; they need a research partner with the scale, therapeutic knowledge, and operational excellence to deliver results.
ICON’s commitment to advancing Women’s Health research
ICON brings deep therapeutic knowledge, operational precision, and global infrastructure to support robust clinical research in women’s health. With over 184 clinical studies in women’s health, involving more than 64,700 patients and 8,200 sites worldwide, ICON has already contributed significantly to the evolving landscape of women’s health research. Our expertise span the full spectrum of women’s health, from menopause-related conditions and fertility to maternal health, sexual health, and supportive care in oncology.
Further, ICON study teams are proficient in the design and execution of women’s health trials, which rely on complex endpoint collection, including DEXA, transvaginal ultrasound (TVU), endometrial biopsy, and PRO-based assessments. ICON also supports sponsors in navigating the regulatory and scientific considerations involved in COA selection, especially in areas where fit-for-purpose instruments are lacking or must be adapted for specific populations.
As more agencies and researchers push for equity in drug development, using fit-for-purpose COAs and partnering with organizations like ICON, which bring therapeutic knowledge, regulatory insight, and proven operational delivery to every trial, will be critical.
Learn more or work with ICON for your women’s health portfolio: https://www.iconplc.com/therapeutics/womens-health
References
1 Ploszajski, A. (2024) “Women’s Health: Women's health is in crisis; Imperial experts are calling for a fairer system that works for everyone.” Imperial College London. Available at: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/stories/womens-health/
2 Whiting, K. (2024) “Women's health gap: 6 conditions that highlight gender inequality in healthcare”. World Economic Forum. Available at: https://www.weforum.org/stories/2024/10/women-health-gap-healthcare-gender/
3 Food and Drug Administration (FDA). (2015) Women's Health Research Roadmap 2015. Available at: https://www.fda.gov/consumers/about-owh-research/womens-health-research-roadmap
In this section
-
Digital Disruption
-
Clinical strategies to optimise SaMD for treating mental health
-
Digital Disruption: Surveying the industry's evolving landscape
- AI and clinical trials
-
Clinical trial data anonymisation and data sharing
-
Clinical Trial Tokenisation
-
Closing the evidence gap: The value of digital health technologies in supporting drug reimbursement decisions
-
Digital disruption in biopharma
-
Disruptive Innovation
- Remote Patient Monitoring
-
Personalising Digital Health
- Real World Data
-
The triad of trust: Navigating real-world healthcare data integration
-
Decoding AI in software as a medical device (SaMD)
-
Software as a medical device (SaMD)
-
Clinical strategies to optimise SaMD for treating mental health
-
Patient Centricity
-
Agile Clinical Monitoring
-
Capturing the voice of the patient in clinical trials
-
Charting the Managed Access Program Landscape
-
Developing Nurse-Centric Medical Communications
- Representation and inclusion in clinical trials
-
Exploring the patient perspective from different angles
-
Patient safety and pharmacovigilance
-
A guide to safety data migrations
-
Taking safety reporting to the next level with automation
-
Outsourced Pharmacovigilance Affiliate Solution
-
The evolution of the Pharmacovigilance System Master File: Benefits, challenges, and opportunities
-
Sponsor and CRO pharmacovigilance and safety alliances
-
Understanding the Periodic Benefit-Risk Evaluation Report
-
A guide to safety data migrations
-
Patient voice survey
-
Patient Voice Survey - Decentralised and Hybrid Trials
-
Reimagining Patient-Centricity with the Internet of Medical Things (IoMT)
-
Using longitudinal qualitative research to capture the patient voice
-
Prioritising patient-centred research for regulatory approval
-
Agile Clinical Monitoring
-
Regulatory Intelligence
-
An innovative approach to rare disease clinical development
- EU Clinical Trials Regulation
-
Using innovative tools and lean writing processes to accelerate regulatory document writing
-
Current overview of data sharing within clinical trial transparency
-
Global Agency Meetings: A collaborative approach to drug development
-
Keeping the end in mind: key considerations for creating plain language summaries
-
Navigating orphan drug development from early phase to marketing authorisation
-
Procedural and regulatory know-how for China biotechs in the EU
-
RACE for Children Act
-
Early engagement and regulatory considerations for biotech
-
Regulatory Intelligence Newsletter
-
Requirements & strategy considerations within clinical trial transparency
-
Spotlight on regulatory reforms in China
-
Demystifying EU CTR, MDR and IVDR
-
Transfer of marketing authorisation
-
Exploring FDA guidance for modern Data Monitoring Committees
-
Streamlining dossier preparation
-
An innovative approach to rare disease clinical development
-
Therapeutics insights
-
Endocrine and Metabolic Disorders
- Cardiovascular
- Cell and Gene Therapies
-
Central Nervous System
-
A mind for digital therapeutics
-
Challenges and opportunities in traumatic brain injury clinical trials
-
Challenges and opportunities in Parkinson’s Disease clinical trials
-
Early, precise and efficient; the methods and technologies advancing Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s R&D
-
Key Considerations in Chronic Pain Clinical Trials
-
ICON survey report: CNS therapeutic development
-
A mind for digital therapeutics
-
Glycomics
- Infectious Diseases
- NASH
- Obesity
- Oncology
- Paediatrics
-
Respiratory
-
Rare and orphan diseases
-
Advanced therapies for rare diseases
-
Cross-border enrollment of rare disease patients
-
Crossing the finish line: Why effective participation support strategy is critical to trial efficiency and success in rare diseases
-
Diversity, equity and inclusion in rare disease clinical trials
-
Identify and mitigate risks to rare disease clinical programmes
-
Leveraging historical data for use in rare disease trials
-
Natural history studies to improve drug development in rare diseases
-
Patient Centricity in Orphan Drug Development
-
The key to remarkable rare disease registries
-
Therapeutic spotlight: Precision medicine considerations in rare diseases
-
Advanced therapies for rare diseases
-
Endocrine and Metabolic Disorders
-
Transforming Trials
-
Accelerating biotech innovation from discovery to commercialisation
-
Ensuring the validity of clinical outcomes assessment (COA) data: The value of rater training
-
Linguistic validation of Clinical Outcomes Assessments
-
Optimising biotech funding
- Adaptive clinical trials
-
Best practices to increase engagement with medical and scientific poster content
-
Decentralised clinical trials
-
Biopharma perspective: the promise of decentralised models and diversity in clinical trials
-
Decentralised and Hybrid clinical trials
-
Practical considerations in transitioning to hybrid or decentralised clinical trials
-
Navigating the regulatory labyrinth of technology in decentralised clinical trials
-
Biopharma perspective: the promise of decentralised models and diversity in clinical trials
-
eCOA implementation
-
Blended solutions insights
-
Clinical trials in Japan: An enterprise growth and management strategy
-
How investments in supply of CRAs is better than competing with the demand for CRAs
-
The evolution of FSP: not just for large pharma
-
Embracing a blended operating model
-
Observations in outsourcing: Survey results show a blended future
-
Clinical trials in Japan: An enterprise growth and management strategy
-
Implications of COVID-19 on statistical design and analyses of clinical studies
-
Improving pharma R&D efficiency
-
Increasing Complexity and Declining ROI in Drug Development
-
Innovation in Clinical Trial Methodologies
- Partnership insights
-
Risk Based Quality Management
-
Transforming the R&D Model to Sustain Growth
-
Accelerating biotech innovation from discovery to commercialisation
-
Value Based Healthcare
-
Strategies for commercialising oncology treatments for young adults
-
US payers and PROs
-
Accelerated early clinical manufacturing
-
Cardiovascular Medical Devices
-
CMS Part D Price Negotiations: Is your drug on the list?
-
COVID-19 navigating global market access
-
Ensuring scientific rigor in external control arms
-
Evidence Synthesis: A solution to sparse evidence, heterogeneous studies, and disconnected networks
-
Health technology assessment
-
Perspectives from US payers
-
ICER’s impact on payer decision making
-
Making Sense of the Biosimilars Market
-
Medical communications in early phase product development
-
Navigating the Challenges and Opportunities of Value Based Healthcare
-
Payer Reliance on ICER and Perceptions on Value Based Pricing
-
Payers Perspectives on Digital Therapeutics
-
Precision Medicine
-
RWE Generation Cross Sectional Studies and Medical Chart Review
-
Survey results: How to engage healthcare decision-makers
-
The affordability hurdle for gene therapies
-
The Role of ICER as an HTA Organisation
-
Integrating openness and precision for competitive advantage
-
Strategies for commercialising oncology treatments for young adults
-
Blog
-
Videos
-
Webinar Channel