Comparison

Astraea vs. Traditional CRO & In-House Biometrics

A traditional CRO or in-house team brings deep therapeutic expertise and accountability regulators trust. Astraea automates the mechanical 80% of the biometrics pipeline around that expertise — so submission-ready outputs arrive in days, not months.

What is Astraea?

Astraea is clinical trial automation software that pharmaceutical sponsors run themselves — not a CRO, and not a web-hosted service. It automates everything after protocol design and raw data collection: the SAP, eCRFs, TFLs, SDTM and ADaM datasets, Define-XML, QC, and the full set of FDA submission documents, in one auditable system. Because forward-deployed engineers install it inside the sponsor's own environment, Astraea never sees or holds your data. It is backed by Y Combinator (P26) and works across oncology, rare disease, other therapeutic areas, and medical devices.

The verdict

A traditional CRO or in-house biometrics team is the right choice when you need deep therapeutic judgment, established regulatory relationships, and a single accountable partner. Astraea is the right choice for teams that want the entire biometrics pipeline — SDTM, ADaM, TFLs, Define-XML, and Pinnacle 21-style QC — automated end to end in one auditable system that runs inside your own environment, where Astraea never sees your data, compressing months of manual programming into days while statisticians keep control of every scientific decision. Astraea is software your team runs to take control — not a CRO that runs the trial for you.

Side by side

How Astraea compares to a CRO or in-house team.

Overseeing a CRO and running biometrics in-house are different operating models — both carry high cost and long timelines. Astraea removes the manual labor from either path without removing the expertise.

CriterionAstraeaTraditional CROIn-House Biometrics
End-to-end pipeline in one system
YesSAP, eCRFs, TFLs, SDTM/ADaM, Define-XML, QC, documents — one auditable system
PartialStitched across vendor teams, tools, and handoffs
PartialStitched across internal functions and point tools
Time to submission-ready outputs
YesDays
NoMonths (industry avg ~68-day build, ~35-day lock)
NoMonths, gated by internal team capacity
Automation model
YesAgentic execution, human-reviewed
NoManual SAS/R programming by vendor FTEs
NoManual SAS/R programming by internal staff
Human-in-the-loop control
YesNamed-reviewer sign-off on every output
YesCRO statisticians own the analysis
YesYour statisticians own it directly
Auditability & traceability
YesFull lineage, versioning, 21 CFR Part 11 aligned
YesStandard practice (double programming)
YesDepends on internal SOPs and double programming
CDISC / regulatory conformance
YesSDTM, ADaM, Define-XML, Pinnacle 21-style checks built in
YesEstablished conformance workflows
PartialRelies on in-house CDISC expertise
Therapeutic & indication coverage
YesClients across oncology, rare disease, other indications, and devices
YesDeep, cross-indication, established
PartialLimited to your team's own indications
Cost model
YesPlatform subscription
NoPer-study fees / vendor FTE billing
NoFull-time headcount, tooling, and overhead
Data ownership & control
YesRuns in your environment; Astraea never sees your data
PartialFragmented across vendor handoffs
YesData stays inside your own environment
Deployment / ramp
YesInstalled in your environment by forward-deployed engineers
NoVendor onboarding and contracting
NoHiring and ramping a specialized team

Where a CRO wins

What a traditional CRO or in-house team does best.

Deep therapeutic expertise

Established CROs bring cross-indication statistical judgment and years of study-design experience that Astraea does not replace.

Regulatory relationships & accountability

A CRO is a single accountable partner with existing FDA/EMA/PMDA relationships and defense experience through inspection.

Full-service trial operations

A CRO can run the whole trial operationally — site management, monitoring, and clinical operations — as an outsourced service. Astraea is software your team runs to create and control your own trials, not a services team that runs them for you.

Where Astraea wins

Three reasons teams automate the pipeline with Astraea.

01 · Whole pipeline

One system, not stitched tools and teams.

Astraea automates everything after protocol and raw data — the SAP, eCRFs, TFLs, SDTM and ADaM datasets, Define-XML, QC, and submission documents — in one auditable system, instead of stitching outputs across separate teams and point tools.

02 · Months to days

Compressed timelines, without losing control.

Agentic execution compresses the mechanical ~80% of biometrics work — derivations, mapping, QC — that takes months of manual programming today, while statisticians keep scientific judgment and named-reviewer sign-off on every output.

03 · Built for regulators

Inspection-ready by construction.

CDISC-native with Pinnacle 21-style checks built in, full lineage and versioning, and 21 CFR Part 11-aligned audit trails — inspection-ready by construction, not reverse-engineered at study end.

FAQ

Astraea vs. CRO, answered.

The questions biometrics and biostatistics leads ask most when weighing automation against a traditional CRO or in-house team.

Astraea vs. Traditional CRO — Common Questions

Is Astraea better than a traditional CRO?
Astraea is better for teams that want the biometrics pipeline automated end to end in days rather than months. A traditional CRO is better when a study requires deep therapeutic judgment, established regulatory relationships, and a single accountable partner. Many teams use Astraea to automate the mechanical work while their statisticians or CRO retain scientific ownership.
What is the difference between Astraea and a CRO?
A CRO staffs people to manually program clinical trial datasets, tables, and submission outputs. Astraea is an AI-native platform that automates that pipeline — generating SDTM and ADaM datasets, TFLs, Define-XML, and Pinnacle 21-style QC in one auditable system — with human reviewers approving every output.
Is Astraea cheaper than a CRO?
Astraea uses a platform subscription model rather than per-study FTE headcount, which removes the labor cost of manual statistical programming. Actual savings depend on study scope and complexity. The structural difference is that automation replaces the mechanical programming hours a CRO bills as staffed labor.
Can Astraea replace my CRO or in-house team?
Astraea replaces the mechanical, repetitive programming work — derivations, mapping, and QC — not the scientific judgment. Statisticians and biostatisticians keep control of design decisions and approve every output, so scarce experts focus on the high-judgment 20% rather than the manual 80%.
Who should use a traditional CRO instead of Astraea?
Teams that need deep, cross-indication therapeutic expertise, a single accountable vendor with established regulatory relationships, or full-service clinical operations beyond biometrics should use a traditional CRO. Astraea is focused specifically on automating the pipeline after protocol and raw data, with clients across essentially every indication, including oncology, rare disease, and devices.

See months of biometrics work compressed into days.

Keep your statisticians in control of the science. Let Astraea automate the pipeline around them — CDISC-native, auditable, and inspection-ready by construction.