What Shapes Phase II Respiratory CTIS Timelines and Delays?
Clinical Trial Intelligence

What Shapes Phase II Respiratory CTIS Timelines and Delays?

20 July 2026

Across 120 European Phase II respiratory trials, the median end to end EU CTIS submission time was 106 days with an SD of 42.2 days. Country specific CTIS Part II decisions also had a 106 day median, but a much wider 221.8 day SD. Scale was the clearest correlate: one country trials had an 83 day median versus 113 days for trials in seven or more countries.

Trials
120
End to end median
106days
Part II median
106days
Approved by 120 days
85.0%

EU CTIS review times center at 106 days

End to end timing, defined from initial EU CTIS submission to first authorization, had a median of 106 days and an SD of 42.2 days. Country specific Part II timing was measured across 443 country decisions and had the same median but a 221.8 day SD, showing substantially greater country level dispersion.

Median, interquartile range and SD
End to end EU CTIS
106 days
IQR 66 to 115 days
SD 42.2 days
Range 2 to 293 days
Country specific CTIS Part II
106 days
IQR 31 to 390 days
SD 221.8 days
Range 1 to 859 days
120 trials for end to end timing; 443 country specific Part II observations. SD is population standard deviation.
Interpretation

The typical EU submission reached authorization in roughly three and a half months, but country specific Part II timing was far less predictable than the overall end to end pathway.

Approval probability rises sharply between 90 and 120 days

Only 39 of 120 trials, or 32.5%, completed end to end EU CTIS review within 90 days. The rate rose to 102 of 120, or 85.0%, within 120 days. Country specific Part II decisions accumulated more slowly after the 106 day median.

Cumulative proportion completed
Within 30 days
18/120 trials · 107/443 country decisions
End to end
15.0%
Part II
24.2%
Within 60 days
30/120 trials · 185/443 country decisions
End to end
25.0%
Part II
41.8%
Within 90 days
39/120 trials · 202/443 country decisions
End to end
32.5%
Part II
45.6%
Within 106 days
61/120 trials · 222/443 country decisions
End to end
50.8%
Part II
50.1%
Within 120 days
102/120 trials · 231/443 country decisions
End to end
85.0%
Part II
52.1%
Within 150 days
118/120 trials · 237/443 country decisions
End to end
98.3%
Part II
53.5%
Within 180 days
119/120 trials · 248/443 country decisions
End to end
99.2%
Part II
56.0%
The 106 day threshold equals the cohort median for both measures.
Interpretation

For planning, 90 days was achieved by fewer than one third of trials, whereas a 120 day end to end allowance covered 85.0% of EU CTIS submissions.

Country specific CTIS Part II medians range from 34 to 564 days

Croatia had the lowest observed Part II median at 34 days, followed by Latvia at 51.5 days, Austria at 52 days and Portugal at 54 days. Among countries with at least 20 observations, the Netherlands was fastest at 75 days, followed by Belgium at 76 days, Italy at 94 days and Spain at 98 days.

Part II processing time by country
Country n Median days SD days
Croatia 2 34 13
Latvia 6 51.5 116.9
Austria 9 52 176.3
Portugal 9 54 236.8
Netherlands 31 75 218.5
Belgium 25 76 227.2
Bulgaria 13 91 198.9
Italy 53 94 235.0
Spain 53 98 244.3
Greece 15 99 132.8
France 46 100 258.6
Poland 35 106 193.3
Czechia 20 136 216.5
Denmark 19 139 215.1
Germany 52 139 213.3
Hungary 14 150 193.0
Slovakia 4 167 100.9
Lithuania 1 208 0
Ireland 9 211 259.6
Romania 14 212.5 166.0
Norway 5 263 213.6
Finland 3 335 185.0
Sweden 4 339 205.4
Estonia 1 564 0
End to end timing is an EU submission level measure and is therefore reported overall, not by individual country. Country rows report CTIS Part II only.
Interpretation

Country selection materially changes Part II exposure. High SDs in many countries indicate that the median should be used with a contingency buffer rather than as a fixed operational promise.

Submission scale is the clearest correlate of delay

Number of countries had the strongest continuous association with end to end time, with a Spearman correlation of 0.47. One country trials had an 83 day median and 41.7% reached 90 days or longer; trials in seven or more countries had a 113 day median and 91.3% reached 90 days or longer.

EU submission scale
1 country
83days
48 trials · 77.1% faster than median · 41.7% ≥90 days
2 to 3 countries
108days
21 trials · 42.9% faster than median · 85.7% ≥90 days
4 to 6 countries
111.5days
28 trials · 28.6% faster than median · 82.1% ≥90 days
7 or more countries
113days
23 trials · 21.7% faster than median · 91.3% ≥90 days
Share taking at least 90 days
0 to 5 sites
57.1% ≥90d
6 to 15 sites
65.7% ≥90d
16 to 30 sites
63.2% ≥90d
31 or more sites
95.8% ≥90d
Site count correlation with end to end time: Spearman 0.23. Target sample size correlation: Spearman 0.24.
Interpretation

The largest timing penalty appeared when EU CTIS submissions expanded across countries and sites. A staged country strategy is the most direct upstream lever suggested by the dataset.

Sponsor and operating model track submission complexity

Pharmaceutical sponsored trials had a 112 day median versus 83 days for academic or healthcare sponsored trials. The commercial group was also larger, with medians of five countries, 17 sites and 120 participants versus one country, four sites and 40 participants, indicating that sponsor type is closely bundled with scale.

Sponsor group
Academic or healthcare sponsor
83
median days
57 trials · 73.7% faster than median · 43.9% ≥90 days
Median 1 country and 4 sites
Pharmaceutical sponsor
112
median days
63 trials · 27.0% faster than median · 90.5% ≥90 days
Median 5 countries and 17 sites
Selected operating model contrasts
Feature present Median days Below median ≥90 days Comparison
CRO present
n=50
112 30.0% 88.0% No CRO: 95 days, 62.9% fast, 54.3% ≥90d (n=70)
Digital recruitment
n=32
113.5 31.2% 90.6% No digital recruitment: 101 days, 55.7% fast, 60.2% ≥90d (n=88)
Randomised design
n=66
109 43.9% 77.3% Non-randomised: 99 days, 55.6% fast, 57.4% ≥90d (n=54)
Blinded design
n=79
108 45.6% 74.7% Open label: 96 days, 56.1% fast, 56.1% ≥90d (n=41)
Interpretation

CRO use and digital recruitment were associated with longer review, but both occurred in larger, more complex programs. They should be read as complexity markers, not direct causes of regulatory delay.

Disease, modality and design show secondary timing differences

Lung cancer and thoracic oncology trials had a 94 day median and 51.5% took at least 90 days. COPD and emphysema had a 118 day median and 88.9% took at least 90 days. Small molecule trials were more often faster than the cohort median than antibody based trials, 63.6% versus 27.8%.

Disease groups with at least eight trials
Lung cancer and thoracic oncology
94d · 51.5% ≥90
Other respiratory disease
101d · 66.7% ≥90
Respiratory infection
104d · 60.0% ≥90
Fibrotic and interstitial lung disease
108d · 77.8% ≥90
Cystic fibrosis and bronchiectasis
110d · 75.0% ≥90
Asthma and eosinophilic disease
113d · 84.6% ≥90
COPD and emphysema
118d · 88.9% ≥90
Modality group
Modality n Median days Below median ≥90 days
Small molecule 44 101 63.6% 59.1%
Other modality 6 107.5 50.0% 66.7%
Mixed modalities 37 108 45.9% 70.3%
Other biologic 15 109 40.0% 80.0%
Antibody based 18 111.5 27.8% 77.8%
Interpretation

The disease and modality signals were smaller than the country and sponsor scale effects. Randomised, blinded and adaptive designs also had higher medians, but their timing differences were consistent with greater program complexity.

Submission month shows a pronounced but uneven timing pattern

September submissions had the lowest median at 39 days, with 73.3% faster than the cohort median and 33.3% taking at least 90 days. October had the highest median among months with at least seven trials at 129 days, while July and December had 100.0% and 92.9% of submissions respectively taking at least 90 days.

Month of initial EU CTIS submission
Month n Median days Below median ≥90 days
January 9 73 77.8% 44.4%
February 8 107 50.0% 75.0%
March 8 111.5 25.0% 87.5%
April 5 105 60.0% 60.0%
May 14 112 21.4% 85.7%
June 13 91 61.5% 53.8%
July 11 109 36.4% 100.0%
August 9 88 88.9% 44.4%
September 15 39 73.3% 33.3%
October 7 129 14.3% 85.7%
November 7 104 57.1% 57.1%
December 14 112 28.6% 92.9%
Interpretation

Month effects are operationally useful for forecasting but are likely influenced by the mix of countries, sponsors and study designs submitted in each month. They are weaker planning levers than submission scale.

Planning implications for Phase II respiratory EU submissions

Faster profile

One country submissions had a median of 83 days and 77.1% were faster than 106 days. Academic or healthcare sponsored trials had an 83 day median, and small molecule trials had a 101 day median with 63.6% below the cohort median.

Delay profile

Seven or more countries produced a 113 day median and 91.3% exceeded 90 days. Trials with 31 or more sites had a 111 day median and 95.8% exceeded 90 days. CRO supported trials had an 88.0% 90 day delay rate.

Operational priority: set a 120 day base case for end to end EU CTIS authorization, add country specific Part II contingency, and treat expansion beyond three countries or 30 sites as a material delay risk.

Definitions: End to end time is calendar days from initial CTIS submission to first authorization. Part II is the country specific CTIS review component. Faster than median means fewer than 106 days. Two month and three month delays are defined as at least 60 and at least 90 calendar days. All associations are descriptive and do not establish causality.