EU Phase II Neurology CTIS Timelines & Contributing Factors
Clinical Trial Intelligence

EU Phase II Neurology CTIS Timelines and Contributing Factors

19 July 2026

Across 247 Phase II neurology trials, the median end-to-end interval from initial Clinical Trials Information System (CTIS) submission to first EU authorization was 100 days (SD 43.8). Across 677 country-level CTIS Part II decisions, the median was 137 days (SD 252.7), and 370/677 (54.7%) reached 90 days or longer. Member state, submission month, site burden, third-party complexity, CRO involvement, adaptive design and orphan status showed the largest descriptive associations with timing.

247
Phase II neurology trials included
100 d
Median EU CTIS end-to-end review · SD 43.8
137 d
Median country-specific CTIS Part II · SD 252.7
54.7%
Part II decisions at ≥90 days · 370/677

How quickly are Phase II neurology trials authorized through EU CTIS?

Only 42/247 trials (17.0%) reached first authorization within 30 days of initial CTIS submission. The cumulative share rose to 84/247 (34.0%) by 60 days, 107/247 (43.3%) by 90 days and 197/247 (79.8%) by 120 days.

Cumulative EU CTIS end-to-end authorization
≤ 30 days
17.0% (42/247)
≤ 60 days
34.0% (84/247)
≤ 90 days
43.3% (107/247)
≤ 120 days
79.8% (197/247)
≤ 180 days
99.2% (245/247)
Trial-level measure: initial CTIS submission to first EU authorization. End-to-end timing is not assigned to individual countries.
Interpretation

The 100-day median means a 90-day end-to-end planning assumption would cover fewer than half of Phase II neurology submissions: 107/247 (43.3%) were authorized by that point.

How long does country-specific CTIS Part II take?

Across 677 member-state decisions, 170 (25.1%) completed within 30 days, 285 (42.1%) within 60 days and 308 (45.5%) within 90 days. The 137-day median and 252.7-day SD show a long right tail rather than a tightly clustered process.

Cumulative country-specific CTIS Part II decisions
≤ 30 days
25.1% (170/677)
≤ 60 days
42.1% (285/677)
≤ 90 days
45.5% (308/677)
≤ 120 days
48.9% (331/677)
≤ 180 days
54.5% (369/677)
Country-level measure: earliest CTIS Part II submission in the member state to its latest decision or authorization date.
Interpretation

CTIS Part II is the country-specific component. A 60-day assumption covered 285/677 decisions (42.1%); 397/677 (58.6%) took at least 60 days and 370/677 (54.7%) took at least 90 days.

Which countries show the shortest and longest CTIS Part II timelines?

Among countries with at least five observations, Denmark had the shortest median at 27 days (n=17), followed by Sweden at 32.5 days (n=16) and Finland at 35.5 days (n=8). Norway had the longest median at 282 days (n=10), followed by Austria at 276 days (n=15) and Germany at 254 days (n=71).

Median CTIS Part II days by country · n≥5
Denmarkn=17
27.0 d
Swedenn=16
32.5 d
Finlandn=8
35.5 d
Slovakian=7
37.0 d
Belgiumn=34
43.0 d
Hungaryn=15
54.0 d
Irelandn=5
60.0 d
Netherlandsn=55
68.0 d
Czechian=36
86.5 d
Bulgarian=12
94.0 d
Polandn=63
110.0 d
Greecen=7
118.0 d
Romanian=8
127.0 d
Italyn=82
170.0 d
Francen=91
176.0 d
Spainn=98
176.5 d
Portugaln=15
181.0 d
Germanyn=71
254.0 d
Austrian=15
276.0 d
Norwayn=10
282.0 d
Lower is faster. Standard deviation is shown in the complete table below because country distributions contain substantial long tails.
Complete country breakdown: median and standard deviation
CountrynMedian daysSD≤60 days≥90 days
Cyprus 1 2.0 100.0% 0.0%
Latvia 2 25.5 9.2 100.0% 0.0%
Denmark 17 27.0 189.8 64.7% 35.3%
Lithuania 2 27.0 7.1 100.0% 0.0%
Sweden 16 32.5 252.0 56.2% 37.5%
Finland 8 35.5 282.4 75.0% 25.0%
Slovakia 7 37.0 215.8 57.1% 42.9%
Belgium 34 43.0 266.4 55.9% 41.2%
Hungary 15 54.0 208.2 53.3% 40.0%
Ireland 5 60.0 298.9 60.0% 40.0%
Netherlands 55 68.0 284.2 47.3% 49.1%
Czechia 36 86.5 206.4 44.4% 47.2%
Bulgaria 12 94.0 236.3 41.7% 50.0%
Poland 63 110.0 248.8 44.4% 52.4%
Greece 7 118.0 164.4 28.6% 71.4%
Romania 8 127.0 244.6 37.5% 62.5%
Iceland 1 143.0 0.0% 100.0%
Italy 82 170.0 266.4 29.3% 68.3%
France 91 176.0 244.9 40.7% 53.8%
Spain 98 176.5 251.2 42.9% 55.1%
Portugal 15 181.0 243.0 26.7% 66.7%
Germany 71 254.0 266.4 33.8% 64.8%
Austria 15 276.0 268.3 40.0% 60.0%
Norway 10 282.0 287.9 30.0% 70.0%
Slovenia 2 400.5 348.6 0.0% 100.0%
Croatia 3 581.0 168.6 0.0% 100.0%
Luxembourg 1 663.0 0.0% 100.0%
SD is descriptive and is not estimable for a single observation. Country values apply only to CTIS Part II, not to the overall EU end-to-end decision.
Interpretation

Country selection materially changes the expected Part II path. The difference between Denmark and Norway was 255 median days among countries with at least five observations.

Does the month of CTIS submission correlate with review time?

Month showed a stronger gradient for Part II than for end-to-end review. December, January and March Part II submissions had medians of 42.0, 39.0 and 39.5 days, while April, July and August had medians of 368.0, 273.0 and 296.0 days. For end-to-end review, September was shortest at 45 days and November longest at 116 days.

Submission month, median days and ≥90-day delay rate
MonthEnd-to-endPart II
nMedian≥90dnMedian≥90d
January 19 94.0 57.9% 66 39.0 40.9%
February 10 107.0 70.0% 57 80.0 47.4%
March 19 98.0 52.6% 60 39.5 40.0%
April 18 91.5 55.6% 67 368.0 65.7%
May 11 102.0 63.6% 56 268.5 60.7%
June 17 108.0 64.7% 44 239.5 61.4%
July 21 112.0 71.4% 49 273.0 77.6%
August 24 84.0 41.7% 59 296.0 76.3%
September 27 45.0 37.0% 74 74.5 48.6%
October 29 113.0 58.6% 62 123.5 58.1%
November 27 116.0 77.8% 43 88.0 48.8%
December 25 100.0 52.0% 40 42.0 27.5%
Month-of-year analysis is pooled; no year is used as an explanatory variable.
Interpretation

For CTIS Part II, April submissions were 326 median days longer than December submissions. This is a scheduling signal, not proof that the calendar month itself causes delay.

What correlates with shorter-than-median end-to-end authorization?

“Shorter” means below the 100-day trial-level median. Smaller site footprints, fewer external parties, no CRO and non-pharmaceutical sponsorship were the clearest operational signals.

End-to-end operational contrasts
Site footprint
1–3 sites · n=95
87 d62.1% <100d · 48.4% ≥90d
26+ sites · n=37
112 d29.7% <100d · 73.0% ≥90d
CRO involvement
No CRO · n=118
83 d61.0% <100d · 46.6% ≥90d
CRO present · n=129
110 d39.5% <100d · 67.4% ≥90d
Third parties
None · n=73
82 d61.6% <100d · 46.6% ≥90d
6–10 · n=51
112 d29.4% <100d · 72.5% ≥90d
Primary sponsor
Hospital/clinic · n=69
85 d59.4% <100d · 49.3% ≥90d
Pharma company · n=145
108 d43.4% <100d · 63.4% ≥90d
Unadjusted pooled associations. CRO and third-party involvement may act as markers of larger or more complex multinational programmes.
Interpretation

Increasing from 1–3 to 26+ sites added 25 median days and reduced the share below the 100-day median from 62.1% to 29.7%. The number of sites correlated positively with end-to-end days (Spearman ρ=0.23).

What correlates with 60- and 90-day CTIS Part II delays?

For country-specific Part II, complexity markers were more pronounced. Adaptive trials, orphan programmes, CRO-supported submissions, larger trial footprints and more external parties all showed higher medians and higher ≥90-day rates.

Part II delay signals
Adaptive design
Non-adaptive · n=508
101.5 d56.9% ≥60d · 51.6% ≥90d
Adaptive · n=169
276 d63.9% ≥60d · 63.9% ≥90d
Orphan programme
Non-orphan · n=540
115.5 d56.5% ≥60d · 52.8% ≥90d
Orphan · n=137
263 d67.2% ≥60d · 62.0% ≥90d
CRO involvement
No CRO · n=138
43 d43.5% ≥60d · 40.6% ≥90d
CRO present · n=539
173 d62.5% ≥60d · 58.3% ≥90d
Total trial site footprint
1–3 sites · n=104
45.5 d44.2% ≥60d · 40.4% ≥90d
11–25 sites · n=146
264.5 d67.8% ≥60d · 65.8% ≥90d
Third parties
None · n=83
41 d42.2% ≥60d · 41.0% ≥90d
11+ · n=246
201 d67.1% ≥60d · 64.2% ≥90d
Submission month
December · n=40
42 d32.5% ≥60d · 27.5% ≥90d
April · n=67
368 d68.7% ≥60d · 65.7% ≥90d
Country-decision level, pooled across the full dataset. These are associations and should not be interpreted as causal effects.
Interpretation

The largest operational contrast was between trials with 1–3 total sites and 11–25 sites: median Part II differed by 219 days, while the ≥90-day rate rose from 40.4% to 65.8%.

Which neurology diseases and modalities show the greatest Part II variation?

Disease and modality were associated with different CTIS Part II profiles. Migraine/headache and neuro-oncology groups had medians of 32 and 22 days, whereas sleep disorders and epilepsy/neurodevelopmental trials reached 304 and 321 days. Protein/peptide programmes had a 37-day median versus 203 days for small molecules and 219 days for gene therapy.

Disease group · n≥20 country decisions
Disease groupnMedian<137d≥90d
Neuro-oncology25 22.080.0% 20.0%
Migraine / headache27 32.096.3% 7.4%
Stroke / acute brain injury58 40.069.0% 37.9%
Movement disorders54 63.553.7% 48.1%
Neuromuscular / motor neuron124 80.056.5% 49.2%
Other neurology108 126.550.9% 53.7%
Dementia / cognitive disorders99 168.041.4% 64.6%
Demyelinating disease101 232.042.6% 60.4%
Sleep disorders35 304.05.7% 94.3%
Epilepsy / neurodevelopmental46 321.021.7% 82.6%
Modality group · n≥18 country decisions
ModalitynMedian<137d≥90d
Protein / peptide86 37.068.6% 32.6%
Radiopharmaceutical combination35 39.074.3% 34.3%
Multi-modality57 42.064.9% 40.4%
Monoclonal antibody99 169.048.5% 57.6%
Small molecule284 203.040.1% 64.1%
Oligonucleotide42 208.538.1% 61.9%
Gene therapy19 219.042.1% 63.2%
Interpretation

Disease and modality signals partly reflect where and how studies are submitted. They are most useful for benchmarking a like-for-like EU CTIS programme, not for claiming that a therapeutic class directly causes delay.

What should EU neurology submission teams plan for?

The pooled data support four practical planning anchors for Phase II neurology CTIS submissions.

100 days

Use the trial-level median as the central end-to-end CTIS authorization benchmark; only 43.3% completed within 90 days.

137 days

Use the country-specific median for Part II planning, then replace it with member-state medians when the country mix is known.

+219 days

Observed Part II median difference between 1–3-site and 11–25-site trial footprints; build more contingency for complex networks.

27% vs 66%

≥90-day Part II rate was 27.5% for December submissions and 65.7% for April submissions; sequence readiness around month-level patterns.

Definitions

EU CTIS end-to-end: calendar days from initial CTIS submission to first trial authorization. It is a trial-level outcome and is not attributed to individual countries.

CTIS Part II: country-specific review covering local and ethical aspects; calculated from the earliest Part II submission date to the latest country decision or authorization date in the dataset.

Shorter than median: <100 days for end-to-end and <137 days for Part II. Substantial delay thresholds are ≥60 and ≥90 days.

SD: standard deviation, showing dispersion around the mean; high Part II SD reflects the observed long tail.