Why patient engagement must come first in rare disease trials
February 23, 2026 | clinical trials, patient engagement, rare disease
Explore why patient engagement is the cornerstone of successful rare disease trials, emphasising the importance of designing studies around the realities of patients’ lives to build trust and improve outcomes.
For the millions of people living with a rare disease,1 a clinical trial can offer the brightest glimmer of hope. Yet the path to translating clinical trial progress into treatment breakthroughs can be difficult, which can erode trust in these communities. As Rare Disease Day draws near, this month we reflect on a critical truth – successful rare disease trials are not built on scientific ambition alone. They are built on a foundation of genuine patient engagement, designed around the realities of patients’ lives.
The unique challenges of rare disease trials
Developing treatments for rare diseases presents a unique set of obstacles. The patient populations are, by definition, very small and often geographically scattered,2 which makes recruiting enough participants for a study a significant hurdle from the very start.
But there is also a profound human element that needs consideration. Patients and their families carry a heavy emotional burden, navigating diagnoses that few understand. Many face a long, frustrating journey to reach the right diagnosis, often experiencing multiple misdiagnoses and enduring treatments that provide little or no relief, further eroding trust in mainstream healthcare.3,4 Asking them to participate in a trial adds another layer of complexity. The burden of travel to specialist sites, time away from work and/or school and support systems, demanding schedules, and invasive procedures accumulates quickly.5 The strain of participation is more than just a logistical issue; it’s also an emotional and financial one.
Where rare disease trial design can evolve
Patient engagement is especially critical in rare diseases research, yet it is often introduced later in the trial-planning process. This leads to study objectives, designs, and requirements that do not meet the needs of participants. Patients and families are often the true experts in their condition, with deep experiential knowledge that can meaningfully inform trial objectives and goal setting. If participants are brought into the conversation earlier, there is greater opportunity to shape protocols that reflect the realities of living with a rare condition and to enable meaningful, practical input.6
Although regulatory requirements must be met, translating complex scientific information into language that is understandable for non-scientists is particularly important in rare disease communities, where highly knowledgeable patients and caregivers may still face information overload. For example, interviews with people living with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis revealed that the volume and complexity of information can make clinical trial material difficult to understand.5 Clear communication supports confidence, trust, and informed participation.
Rare disease trials also present a unique opportunity to more fully recognise the crucial role of caregivers. Caregivers are deeply embedded in the patient journey – managing logistics, interpreting information, providing emotional support, and frequently influencing participation decisions. Thoughtfully considering their needs, capacity, and insights can strengthen engagement and improve the overall trial experience for both patients and families.
Designing trials in this context requires careful, practical consideration of how studies are structured, communicated and delivered – not just scientific intent.
What meaningful patient engagement looks like in rare disease trials
True patient engagement starts early and is woven into the very fabric of the trial design. In practice, this often comes down to a small number of critical questions: when and how patients are involved, how participation burden is assessed, how information is shared, and whether caregivers are actively supported as part of the trial journey. While established patient groups provide crucial input, meaningful engagement also requires looking beyond these pools to hear wider perspectives. Actively reaching out to underrepresented communities ensures that these foundational questions are answered in a way that reflects a more complete spectrum of experiences, shaping whether engagement is truly meaningful or merely symbolic.
To support this kind of practical decision-making, we’ve captured these engagement considerations in a short, practical checklist to help teams translate patient-centred principles into trial design decisions.
This mindset prioritises clear, empathetic communication. It means replacing jargon with plain language and ensuring families feel heard and respected throughout the process. It’s about designing for feasibility, not perfection. A slightly less ambitious trial that retains all its participants is far more valuable than a “perfect” one that no one can complete.
Why this matters for trial success
A patient-first approach not only addresses the inherent challenges of rare disease research but also directly impacts trial outcomes. When we put patients first, everyone benefits.7 A trial designed with patient realities in mind is more likely to meet its recruitment goals. Participants who feel understood and supported are far more likely to remain in a study, enabling the collection of high-quality data.
Most importantly, it builds trust. By demonstrating a genuine commitment to the community’s well-being, we forge long-term relationships that extend far beyond a single study. Trust then becomes the bedrock for future research and innovation.
References:
- The Lancet Global Health. The landscape for rare diseases in 2024. Available at: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/langlo/article/PIIS2214-109X(24)00056-1/fulltext. Accessed January 2026.
- Boulanger V, et al. Pharmaceut Med. 2020;34(3):185–190.
- Bruce IN, et al. Lupus Science & Medicine. 2023;10:e000856.
- Lupus UK. Research in the news – The impact of misdiagnosis. Available at: https://lupusuk.org.uk/2025/03/03/research-in-the-news-the-impact-of-misdiagnosis/. Accessed February 2026.
- Frost J, et al. Health Expectations. 2025;28: e70260.
- Gaasterland CMW, et al. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2019;14:31.
- Gobat N, et al. Lancet Glob Health. 2025;13(4):e716–e731.
This content was provided by Cuttsy + Cuttsy
Company Details
Latest Content from Cuttsy + Cuttsy
Older trial participants reject bad design, not technology
Older trial participants aren’t rejecting digital technology — they’re rejecting poorly designed, inaccessible experiences that make participation harder.
5 key takeaways from the Patient Centricity and Engagement Conference
Key takeaways from the Patient Centricity and Engagement conference, exploring how trust, inclusion and meaningful partnership can help turn patient engagement from intention into action.
It’s time to stop calling adverse events ‘manageable’
A single word—manageable—can minimise the real burden of treatment side effects, and it’s time clinical trial communication reflected patients’ lived experience more clearly.
The value: why localisation pays off across global trials
Strong localisation reduces trial friction, supports site teams, improves participant understanding and helps global studies run more smoothly, fairly and efficiently.
The solution: Good localisation doesn’t feel translated
Learn what good localisation looks like in clinical trials and why participant-facing materials should feel naturally relevant, culturally appropriate and easy to understand across every market.
Healthcare information is becoming easier to access. Trust isn’t.
Sharing key insights from NEXT Pharma Summit on why trust, clarity and human-centred communication matter more than ever in healthcare.
It was never reluctance: What ASCO 2026 revealed about clinical trial recruitment
ASCO 2026 highlighted that low clinical trial recruitment is driven less by patient reluctance and more by gaps in awareness, communication, accessibility and patient education.
Where translation falls short in practice
Discover why translation alone is not enough in global clinical trials and how expert localisation improves participant understanding, trust and engagement.
Where it all began – why we developed The Experience Gap
Learn how The Experience Gap was developed to help sponsors, CROs and site teams improve clinical trial participation by identifying friction points, enhancing patient experience, and driving better recruitment and...
Cuttsy+Cuttsy launches a practical roadmap to enhance clinical trial participant experience
Cuttsy+Cuttsy has launched The Experience Gap, a practical roadmap designed to help clinical trial teams improve participant engagement, support and retention across the full study journey.