Insights · Clinical operations

China hosts 28 of 48 recruiting industry atopic dermatitis trials. What that means for site selection.

In less than a decade China went from almost absent to the largest location for industry atopic dermatitis trials. For Phase 2–3 planning that means experienced sites and fierce competition for the same patients.

Rudiger Mees17 Oct 20266 min readData: ClinicalTrials.gov
28of 48 recruiting industry Phase 2–3 AD trials have a site in China
21have a site in the United States
20have no site in China
0 → 28new trials with a China site, 2016 vs 2023

In less than a decade China went from almost absent to the single largest location for industry atopic dermatitis trials. 28 of the 48 industry Phase 2–3 trials recruiting today have at least one site in China; the United States has 21, Poland 10, Germany and Canada 8 each. For anyone planning a Phase 2–3 programme in this disease, that cuts both ways: experienced site networks, and fierce competition for the same patients.

Tile map · where trials recruitReal data

China hosts 28 of 48 recruiting industry atopic dermatitis trials

ClinicalTrials.gov API v2, pulled 17 Oct 2026. Recruiting, interventional, industry lead sponsor, Phase 2–3 atopic dermatitis (n = 48). A multinational trial counts in every country with a site. Tiles are placed roughly by geography.

The shift happened fast

Count new industry Phase 2–3 atopic dermatitis trials by the year they started. In 2016, 0 of 25 had a site in China. By 2023 it was 28 of 53, more than half. In 2024 China appeared in more new trials than the United States (25 against 21); in 2025 the two were level at 23.

Lines · new trials by start yearReal data

China overtook the United States in new atopic dermatitis trials in 2024

02040602016201720182019202020212022202320242025China 23US 23
With a site in ChinaWith a site in the USAll new trials (bars)
ClinicalTrials.gov API v2, pulled 17 Oct 2026. Interventional, industry lead sponsor, Phase 2–3 atopic dermatitis, any status, by registered start date (which can be anticipated for recent trials). A trial with sites in both countries counts in both lines.

What it means for site selection

If your programme includes China, experience is not the constraint; competition is. More than half of the trials recruiting today draw on the same country's patients. Feasibility needs a site-level view of concurrent trials, not a country-level count of past ones.

If your programme excludes China, the field you compete with is thinner than the global count suggests: 20 of the 48 recruiting trials have no site in China. In Europe, Poland (10) and Germany (8) carry the most concurrent trials; Belgium and the Netherlands carry very few.

If you are a global sponsor, the registry shows where trials run, not whether regulators will accept the data for your filing strategy. That question sits outside the registry and needs regulatory input before any country mix is fixed.

What this analysis does not show

It does not separate China-only trials from China arms of global trials, which are different competitive situations. It counts trials, not sites or patients. Both are the next cut, and both are possible from the same registry records.

Run it yourself

Every number above came from a query you can repeat. Ask the registry the same question for your own indication; the answer is drawn live, with its source and query time.

Try it on the live registryAI-assisted

AI reads your question into filters; every number comes straight from the ClinicalTrials.gov API at the moment you ask.

Method and queries

ClinicalTrials.gov API v2, pulled 17 Oct 2026. Tile map: overall status recruiting; StudyType INTERVENTIONAL; LeadSponsorClass INDUSTRY; Phase 2 or 3; condition "atopic dermatitis"; LocationCountry for 22 countries. Trend: same filters without a status filter, StartDate within each calendar year 2016–2025, total and with LocationCountry China or United States.

Turn a registry question into a defensible decision.

Bring one live programme to an 8-week pilot. We build the board, freeze the evidence and run the decision session with you.

Plan a pilot