Every CRO buys the same site list.
Only one of you has your delivery record.

Market intelligence tells you where trials happened. Yendou combines it with your CRO’s delivery record to show where this study is most likely to work.

Country & Site ID

Product demonstration: the Yendou Country and Site ID workflow in six stages, from study requirements to a strategy committed to the proposal.
01Study requirements
02Market analysis
03Competitive pressure
04Country scenarios
05Site shortlist
06Validation
MEMORY · 478 STUDIES · 2,314 SITESMEMORY · 479 STUDIES · 2,355 SITES
PQNT-25-004 · Protocol v0.8.pdf

A randomised Phase III study of first-line therapy in PD-L1 high advanced NSCLC

Advanced NSCLCStage IVFirst linePD-L1 at or above 50%Phase IIIn = 449
Study and geography8
Trial landscape12
Patient opportunity10
Care pathway10
Startup and operations20
Therapeutic area: OncologyIndication: Advanced NSCLCDisease stage: Stage IVLine of therapy: First lineBiomarker: PD-L1 at or above 50%Evidence through: 06 Aug 2026Permitted regions: NA, WEU, CEE, APACPopulation: AdultsTrial phases: Phase II and IIIStatus: Recruiting or plannedTrial start: 2020 onwardStudy type: InterventionalIntervention model: ParallelAllocation: RandomisedLead organization: IndustrySponsor set: Top 50Exclude: Academic tiersComparable cohort: 104 trialsCompetition window: 2024 to 2027Endpoint: PFS, OSMeasure: IncidenceReporting level: Country and subnationalDisplay: Rate and annual casesMinimum source year: 2023 onwardRegistry coverage: National and validated regionalScreening coverage: IncludedStage at diagnosis: IncludedBiomarker prevalence: PD-L1 highEstimated cases in scope: 1,088,000Care access filter: Routine testingPathway stage: Diagnosis through treatmentBiomarker testing: Routine onlyReimbursement: Show allGuideline source: Current nationalReferral model: Show allLocal validation: Include openStandard of care: Pembrolizumab monotherapyControl arm availability: CheckedPayer model: CapturedDiagnosis capture: CapturedStudy phase: Phase II and IIISubmission route: All applicableRegulatory timeline: Observed rangeEthics model: Central and localEthics timeline: Observed rangeContract and budget: Observed rangeImport or licensing: IncludeSite activation: Observed rangeTotal startup: Observed rangeMaximum startup: 6 months or lessBenchmark period: 2022 onwardMinimum evidence: 5 comparable studiesImport restrictions: CheckedGenetic resources approval: CheckedData export rules: CheckedComparator availability: CheckedSite congestion: MeasuredContract variability: MeasuredSite depth: 102 candidate sitesSponsor patterns: 12 sponsors
EXTRACTING CRITERIA FROM THE SYNOPSIS
CRITERIA SET0921344760
My project › Country and site identification

Select and validate search criteria

Criteria groups
Study and geography8 set
Trial landscape12 set
Patient opportunity10 set
Care pathway10 set
Startup and operations20 set
Your selections
IndicationAdvanced non small cell lung cancer
Disease stageStage IV
Line of therapyFirst line
Biomarker populationPD-L1 at or above 50 percent
Trial phasesPhase II and III
Sponsor setTop 50 sponsors
Maximum startup period6 months or less
Minimum evidence base5 or more comparable studies
Permitted regionsNA, WEU, CEE, APAC
Your search so far
Criteria set60 criteria, 43 fields
Countries in scope14
Comparable trials104
Candidate sites102
Criteria set saved as a template
Build Country & Site StrategyStrategy building
BUILDINGthe market analysis
Comparable trials104
Sponsors in the cohort12
Countries in scope14
Candidate sites102
Patients enrolled, comparable449
Startup benchmarks132 studies
Your delivery records18 studies
Patient opportunity
China575,300
United States124,200
India91,300
Japan50,400
Germany41,000
Sponsor activity
Merck22 trials
Roche18
AstraZeneca17
BeiGene14
Bristol Myers Squibb13
Startup conditions
Poland3 to 5 mo
Germany4 to 6 mo
Spain4 to 6 mo
United Kingdom4 to 7 mo
United States5 to 8 mo
QNT-25-004 › Analytics › Overview

Market analysis

What Yendou built from the criteria: timelines, sponsor activity and where the market is moving.

1. Site selection to activation94 dminimum 35, maximum 169 days
2. Site activation to first patient in48 dminimum 22, maximum 73 days
3. First patient in to last patient in27 mominimum 243, maximum 699 days
Total, selection to last patient in38 mominimum 331, maximum 926 days
Trial timelines over time
Average duration of each interval by year, with the total they add up to.
2020202120222023202420252026
Total, selection to last patient inSite activation to first patient inSite selection to activation
Trials initiated by year
Top 20 sponsors, comparable cohort. 2026 is a part year.
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
Activation is getting slower every year; first patient in is holding. The total is moving because selection is.
QNT-25-004 › Analytics › Market

Market analysis

Who runs comparable trials, where they start, and how the market moves before your first patient in.

COMPARABLE TRIALS104
SPONSORS12
COUNTRIES IN SCOPE14
SELECTION TO LAST PATIENT38 mo
SponsorTrialsCountriesGeographic patternLag to Europe
Merck2231United States and Europe in parallel0 mo
Roche1828Europe first, United States within a quarter3 mo
AstraZeneca1730Global parallel start0 mo
BeiGene1412China first, then United States and Europe14 mo
Bristol Myers Squibb1326United States first5 mo
Innovent114China only, no replicationNot observed
Eli Lilly922United States and Europe in parallel0 mo
Regeneron819United States first7 mo
Market analysis saved: 104 trials, 12 sponsors, 3 geographic patterns
Assess the competitionAssessing
PLAN ASSUMPTIONS AGAINST THE PROJECTS YOU RAN IN EACH COUNTRY
CountryPlan to activationYour median
United States11 wks79d
Germany12 wks82d
Spain13 wks93d
Poland10 wks96d
Japan11 wks79d
Poland: the plan assumes 10 weeks. Your 71 Polish sites across 18 projects ran a 96-day median. Re-sequencing slowest first.
Poland moved to the front of the startup queue
QNT-25-004 › Country plan

Country scenarios

Four ways to place the same study, each read against the projects your CRO ran in every country.

Incidence ledSpreads wide to sit where the patients are
Precedent ledFollows countries that have delivered this population
Speed ledConcentrates in fast countries to protect first patient in
Relationship ledLeans on countries and sites you already work with
CountrySitesFirst patient inYour projects hereEnrolment to planRelationship strength
Poland11 siteswk 1419 projects95%Strong (8)
United States11 siteswk 1638 projects86%Good (6)
Germany6 siteswk 1526 projects91%Strong (7)
Spain9 siteswk 1724 projects89%Good (6)
Japan4 siteswk 1517 projects88%Weak (4)
Scenario B: 5 countries, 41 sites, first patient in week 14 · 124 of your projects behind it
Shortlist the sitesShortlisting
COMPETING TRIALS, SAME POPULATION, SAME WINDOW
KEYNOTE-Q8MerckUnited States38 sites92% overlap
HARMONi-7Akeso / SummitGermany21 sites88% overlap
CheckMate 9LA-2Bristol Myers SquibbSpain18 sites81% overlap
SKYSCRAPER-06RocheUnited Kingdom16 sites76% overlap
EMPOWER-Lung 8RegeneronPoland12 sites72% overlap
LIBRETTO-503Eli LillyAustralia9 sites64% overlap
QNT-25-004 › Analytics › Competition

Competition by country

Trials started in 2026 in this cohort. Red is crowded, grey is quiet.

CountryTrials, 2026PressureReading
United States113Crowded · 113 trialsAttractive, and it cannot recruit at plan speed
China88Crowded · 88 trialsNot in the plan
Germany41Busy · 41 trialsHolds
Spain36Busy · 36 trialsHolds
Japan29Busy · 29 trialsHolds
Poland14Quiet · 14 trialsOpen market, your fastest sites
France22Quiet · 22 trialsReserve
Italy18Quiet · 18 trialsReserve
Recruitment risk exposed before the proposal, not after award
United States capped at 11 sites; Poland raised to 11
YOUR OPERATING EVIDENCE
Your Polish sites7196-day median activation
Your feasibility responses1,20455% acknowledged, 66% complete
Your delivered studies, this indication1895% enrolment to plan
Site relationships43current, named contacts
96dStrong (8)18Current1,20455%95%4396dStrong (8)18Current1,20455%95%43
JOINED TO THE MARKET EVIDENCE
102candidate sites
43with your history
QNT-25-004 › Research sites

Site selection

Ranked on what happened with you, never on the claim. Connection strength across every recorded exchange.

CANDIDATE SITES102
SHORTLISTED41
WITH YOUR HISTORY43
PATIENT TARGET449
Research siteCountryPatients / yrProjects with youActivationConnection strengthYour record
Narodowy Instytut Onkologii, WarsawPoland2603 with you96dStrong (8)Delivered
MD Anderson Cancer Center, HoustonUnited States9409 with you190dStrong (7)Delivered
Charité Comprehensive Cancer Center, BerlinGermany2103 with you120dGood (6)Delivered
Vall d'Hebron, BarcelonaSpain2405 with you110dGood (5)Delivered
Hospital 12 de Octubre, MadridSpain2053 with you118dGood (6)Delivered
Narodowy Instytut Onkologii GliwicePoland2151 with you102dWeak (4)Delivered
Asklepios Fachkliniken GautingGermany140none150dNo communication (0)No record
Moffitt Cancer Center, TampaUnited States6106 with you176dWeak (3)Under-delivered
41 sites shortlisted across 5 countries · 449 patients committed
Enrol in a workflowEnrolled
ENROL THE SHORTLIST · BLINDED FEASIBILITY · SPONSOR AND STUDY NOT DISCLOSED
Select the shortlist41 sites
Enrol in a workflowBlinded feasibility
CDA signature step41 sent
Blinded feasibility step34 responses
QQQQQQQQQQAAAAAAAAA
34 responsesone site never answersAsklepios Gauting, no response
RESPONSES IN09182734
QNT-25-004 › Feasibility in flight

Validate the strategy

Every response stays attached to the country and site it came from.

SITES ENROLLED41
RESPONSES34
PATIENT ACCESS CONFIRMED413
MEDIAN RESPONSE6 days
Research siteCountryStatusPatient accessResponse time
Narodowy Instytut Onkologii, WarsawPolandQuestionnaire complete18 patients4 days
MD Anderson Cancer Center, HoustonUnited StatesProtocol qualified24 patients6 days
Vall d'Hebron, BarcelonaSpainQuestionnaire complete14 patients5 days
Charité, BerlinGermanyProtocol qualified12 patients7 days
Hospital 12 de Octubre, MadridSpainAcknowledgedawaiting9 days
Asklepios Fachkliniken GautingGermanyInvitedno response
413 patients confirmed against a 449 target · 5 countries, 41 sites, evidence trail intact
Commit to the proposalCommitted
ARTEFACTS
Criteria model
Market analysis
Country scenarios
Site shortlist
Committed to proposal

The problem

Same intelligence.Same strategy.

Every CRO can buy access to the same market intelligence. The result: similar countries, similar sites, similar bids.

“Across all CRO proposals we receive, the site list is 90% the same.” Chief Medical Officer · Biotech · Immunology

The solution

Yendou adds what your competitors cannot buy: your own delivery evidence.

Seven steps from the sponsor’s synopsis to a strategy your delivery team signs off. Each one starts from what your CRO has actually delivered, not from the list everyone else bought.

01Study requirements

Start with the study. Not the database.

Begin with the sponsor’s protocol synopsis, indication and operating criteria. Yendou turns those requirements into a study-specific evidence model, so the strategy begins with what this study needs.

Product demonstration: the protocol synopsis is uploaded and its criteria are extracted into a study-specific set for review before the assessment runs.

01Study-specific criteria

02Country strategy

Show where the study can work, and why.

Compare patient opportunity, recruitment precedent, startup conditions, competitive pressure and available site depth across markets. Bring sponsor priorities and delivery constraints into the same decision.

Product demonstration: countries compared on trial activity, selection rate and site depth, the basis for a recommended country scenario.

02Defensible country scenarios

03Delivery commitments

Commit to timelines your delivery team can defend.

Model country allocations and see how each scenario could affect startup, recruitment and first patient in. Commercial and delivery teams work from the same assumptions before timelines enter the proposal.

Product demonstration: proposed country allocations and the startup, recruitment and first-patient-in timelines each scenario produces.

03Delivery scenarios

04Competitive pressure

Expose recruitment risk before it enters the proposal.

Identify competing trials, overlapping populations and site-level pressure before committing the strategy. Separate an attractive market from one in which the study can realistically recruit.

Product demonstration: sponsor trial activity by year, showing where competing studies crowd the same sites and populations.

04Recruitment pressure

05Your operating evidence

Your experience should change the answer.

Combine comparable-market evidence with your own feasibility responses, startup performance, recruitment outcomes and site relationships. Recommend the sites that fit both the study and the way your CRO delivers.

Product demonstration: sites ranked on recruitment, feasibility responsiveness and relevant experience, with your own delivery history beside the market evidence.

05Evidence only your CRO owns

06Continuity

The strategy doesn’t end in a spreadsheet.

Move directly from country and site decisions into site outreach, feasibility and study-startup activity in Yendou.

Sequences: 4, Dependencies: 2
0%(0)
Selected
C&SID
Site Selection
ZSZina Sarif
Jul 29, 2026
CORVUS-RE1 Sites (C&SID)
leads to
0%(0)
Delivered
0%(0)
Opened
0%(0)
Clicked
0%(0)
Completed
Blinded Feasibility
Site Selection
ZSZina Sarif
Aug 19, 2026
Blinded Feasibility

07Pre-award to delivery

Win the study without creating a second beginning.

When the study is awarded, the committed strategy moves directly into startup and delivery team. No repetition or extensive handover needed.

Customer voice
“This saves us hundreds of hours down the track, headaches and arguments with clients. Having a higher level of certainty that you’re selecting the right sites, and being able to show clients where that confidence comes from, has massive downstream time, cost and headache savings for us.”
Head of Study Start-UpMid-cap CRO

Privacy

Your relationship data is not our training data.

Yendou does not train AI models on customer data. Your feasibility history, delivery evidence and site relationships remain yours.

API. MCP.Bring Yendou into your AI tools.

Connect Claude, ChatGPT or your internal systems to Yendou. Search country and site evidence, compare options, update selections and move approved decisions into the study workflow, without copying information between tools.

One synopsis

Send us one protocol synopsis. We return the country and site strategy.

Your study, your delivery record, our workflow. See what a strategy you can defend looks like on your own protocol before you decide anything.

Send a synopsis