Clinical Trial Intelligence

Which CROs Support Ovarian Cancer Phase II/III Trials in Europe, and When Are They Needed Most?

18 June 2026

Across 86 unique CTIS-authorized ovarian, fallopian tube, and primary peritoneal cancer Phase II/III trials in Europe, CROs or CRO-like third parties appear in 51 trials, equal to 59.3%. CRO need rises sharply with geographic and site complexity: 15 of 16 trials with 8+ countries use CROs, and 12 of 14 trials with 51+ sites use CROs. ICON/PRA and IQVIA/Q2 Solutions are the most active CRO groups, each appearing in 15 trials.

Included trials
86
Unique Phase II/III ovarian-related CTIS records
CRO-supported
51 / 86
59.3% of trials list CRO support
Top CRO groups
ICON/PRA + IQVIA
15 trials each, 29.4% of CRO-supported trials
Highest-use capacity band
93.8%
15 of 16 trials with 8+ countries use CROs

Which CROs are most active in European ovarian cancer Phase II/III trials?

ICON/PRA and IQVIA/Q2 Solutions are the leading CRO groups, each supporting 15 of the 51 CRO-supported trials, equal to 29.4%. Clario/Bioclinica/imaging vendors follow with 11 trials, while Almac and PPD/Thermo Fisher each appear in 10 trials.

Top CRO groups by unique trial presence
ICON / PRA15 trials · 29.4%
IQVIA / Q2 Solutions15 · 29.4%
Clario / Bioclinica / Imaging11 · 21.6%
Almac10 · 19.6%
PPD / Thermo Fisher10 · 19.6%
Parexel9 · 17.6%
Medidata8 · 15.7%
WCG Clinical7 · 13.7%
Fortrea6 · 11.8%
Suvoda6 · 11.8%
Percentages use 51 CRO-supported trials as denominator; one trial may list multiple CROs or functional vendors.
Interpretation

The CRO market is not dominated by one provider. CTIS sponsor disclosures show a mixed full-service and specialist vendor model: ICON/PRA and IQVIA lead overall, while Clario/Bioclinica, Medidata, Almac, and PPD/Thermo Fisher appear frequently as imaging, data, laboratory, and supply partners.

At what capacity level are CROs needed most?

CRO use increases most clearly with country and site footprint. CROs are used in 15 of 16 trials with 8+ European countries and in 12 of 14 trials with 51+ sites. Participant volume is less linear, but global target sample size above 300 patients still shows high CRO reliance: 17 of 23 trials.

CRO use rate by geography and site complexity
Number of European countries
1 country8/30 · 26.7%
2–3 countries9/16 · 56.3%
4–7 countries19/24 · 79.2%
8+ countries15/16 · 93.8%
Number of European sites
1–5 sites7/20 · 35.0%
6–20 sites16/29 · 55.2%
21–50 sites16/23 · 69.6%
51+ sites12/14 · 85.7%
EU planned participants
150–299: 13/20
Highest EU participant-band CRO use: 65.0%
Global target sample size
300+: 17/23
73.9% CRO use in larger global programs
Trial-level CRO use by unique CTIS trial record; country, site, and participant counts use European CTIS geography fields.
Interpretation

For ovarian cancer sponsors, CRO need becomes structurally high once CTIS submission work spans 4+ countries or 21+ sites. Country-count complexity is the strongest signal because it multiplies Part II country submissions, site contracting, local documents, and national authorization workflows.

Which ovarian cancer indications use CROs most?

Platinum-resistant ovarian cancer shows the highest CRO reliance among recurring disease segments: 8 of 9 trials use CROs, equal to 88.9%. Basket or multi-tumor trials that include ovarian cancer also show high outsourcing, with CROs in 21 of 28 trials, equal to 75.0%.

CRO use rate by disease or indication wording
Platinum-resistant ovarian cancer8/9 · 88.9%
Basket / multi-tumor including ovarian21/28 · 75.0%
Endometrioid ovarian cancer4/6 · 66.7%
Epithelial ovarian cancer13/21 · 61.9%
Recurrent ovarian cancer10/17 · 58.8%
Fallopian tube cancer17/35 · 48.6%
Primary peritoneal / peritoneal cancer17/35 · 48.6%
Disease segments are derived from CTIS disease wording; a single trial may contribute to more than one indication segment.
Interpretation

CRO demand is highest where trials are operationally harder: platinum-resistant disease, basket trials, and biomarker-defined advanced settings. These trials typically require broader country activation, specialist site networks, central testing, imaging review, and tighter CTIS submission coordination.

Which adjacent complexity signals predict CRO use?

ADC trials show the highest CRO reliance by modality: 21 of 22 ADC-containing trials use CROs, equal to 95.5%. CRO use is also high in dose-escalation or dose-optimization designs, adaptive trials, orphan-drug trials, and biomarker-stratified trials.

CRO use rate by modality and design feature
ADC-containing trials
21 / 22
95.5% CRO use
Dose escalation / optimization
18 / 21
85.7% CRO use
Adaptive designs
18 / 22
81.8% CRO use
Orphan-drug trials
11 / 14
78.6% CRO use
Biomarker-stratified trials
23 / 31
74.2% CRO use
Randomized trials
25 / 38
65.8% CRO use
ADC means antibody-drug conjugate; biomarker-stratified includes trials selecting or stratifying patients by markers such as FRα, HER2, BRCA, KRAS, or CLDN6.
Interpretation

The strongest non-geographic CRO trigger is technical trial complexity. ADC, biomarker, adaptive, and dose-optimization designs require central testing, safety monitoring, imaging review, drug logistics, and CTIS documentation discipline across multiple EU/EEA countries.

What functions are outsourced most often?

Among the 51 CRO-supported trials, central laboratory or biomarker testing is the most common outsourced function, appearing in 41 trials, equal to 80.4%. Digital systems and data capture appear in 32 trials, central imaging or adjudication in 29 trials, and broad CRO study conduct in 28 trials.

Outsourced functions among CRO-supported trials
Central lab / biomarker testing41/51 · 80.4%
Digital systems / data capture32/51 · 62.7%
Central imaging / adjudication29/51 · 56.9%
Broad CRO study conduct28/51 · 54.9%
Supply / translation / materials24/51 · 47.1%
Safety / medical services15/51 · 29.4%
Patient support / reimbursement8/51 · 15.7%
Site operations / monitoring / contracts8/51 · 15.7%
Function categories are trial-level; a trial can include more than one outsourced function in CTIS sponsor third-party declarations.
Interpretation

The most visible outsourced work is not only classic monitoring. In ovarian cancer CTIS submissions, outsourcing clusters around central lab and biomarker infrastructure, digital systems, central imaging, and broad study-conduct vendors. This fits the ovarian pipeline’s reliance on ADCs, biomarker selection, imaging endpoints, and multi-country EU submissions.

Where is the CTIS / EU submission workload concentrated?

Spain, Italy, France, Belgium, and Germany are the largest recurring CTIS geographies by trial-country entries. CRO-supported trials represent 40 of 50 Spanish entries, 34 of 40 French entries, 31 of 37 Belgian entries, 29 of 42 Italian entries, and 22 of 32 German entries.

Top CTIS country entries by CRO-supported share
Country CRO entries Share Site load
Spain40 / 5080.0%386
Italy29 / 4269.0%395
France34 / 4085.0%468
Belgium31 / 3783.8%138
Germany22 / 3268.8%287
Poland19 / 2190.5%108
Czechia15 / 1788.2%74
Participants
Italy
2,959
Participants
Germany
2,469
Participants
France
2,421
Participants
Spain
1,873
Country entries reflect CTIS trial-country participation; site and participant totals are summed across trial-country entries.
Interpretation

The CRO opportunity is concentrated in the large EU ovarian cancer trial geographies: France, Italy, Spain, Germany, Belgium, Poland, and Czechia. These countries combine high site load with frequent CRO-supported CTIS Part II country participation, making them priority markets for submission, startup, site contracting, monitoring, and central-service support.

What does CTIS authorization timing show?

Across 331 country-level CTIS Part II authorization rows with processing-time values, CRO-supported entries have a median processing time of 95.5 days, compared with 342 days for non-CRO-supported entries. This is an observed association, not a causal estimate.

Median CTIS Part II processing time by CRO status
CRO-supported country rows
95.5
median days · 264 rows
Non-CRO country rows
342
median days · 67 rows
Processing time is measured from earliest CTIS Part II submission date to latest decision or authorization date where both values are available.
Interpretation

CRO-supported ovarian cancer submissions are heavily represented in the faster observed CTIS country rows. The operational takeaway is that CRO involvement is most relevant when sponsors need coordinated, repeatable Part II execution across many countries rather than single-country submission support.

Executive takeaways for CRO targeting

The clearest CRO-demand signals in ovarian cancer Phase II/III trials are multi-country CTIS footprint, high site count, ADC modality, biomarker selection, adaptive or dose-optimization design, orphan status, and platinum-resistant disease.

Best CRO prospect profile
Ovarian cancer trials with 4+ EU countries, 21+ sites, ADC or biomarker strategy, and platinum-resistant or basket-trial positioning.
Most competitive CRO field
ICON/PRA and IQVIA/Q2 Solutions lead trial presence, but specialist providers dominate important outsourced functions such as imaging, laboratory testing, EDC/eCOA, eTMF/CTMS, and patient reimbursement.
Best CTIS / EU submission angle
Position CRO support around Part II country activation, local document handling, site contracting, monitoring readiness, and central vendor coordination in France, Italy, Spain, Germany, Belgium, Poland, and Czechia.

Definitions

CRO = contract research organization. CTIS = Clinical Trials Information System. ADC = antibody-drug conjugate. EDC = electronic data capture. eCOA/ePRO = electronic clinical outcome assessment / electronic patient-reported outcome. eTMF/CTMS = electronic trial master file / clinical trial management system.