GrantWise
HORIZON EUROPE TOPIC · Cluster 1 · Health

Personalised approaches to reduce risks from Adverse Drug Reactions due to administration of multiple medications

HORIZON-HLTH-2027-01-CARE-02 — the expected outcomes as checkable statements, what evaluators look for in this topic, and the conditions that shape the proposal.

Get the free Part B working draft for this topic ↓

ForthcomingRIADeadline 17 February 2027EUR 8 million to EUR 10 million per project

GrantWise › Horizon Europe topics › HORIZON-HLTH-2027-01-CARE-02

TopicHORIZON-HLTH-2027-01-CARE-02
StatusForthcoming
CallHORIZON-HLTH-2027-01 — Cluster 1 - Health (Single stage - 2027/1)
DestinationEnsuring equal access to innovative, sustainable, and high-quality healthcare (2026-27)
Type of actionResearch and Innovation Actions
Opening29 October 2026
Deadline17 February 2027
BudgetEUR 8 million to EUR 10 million per project · 4 projects expected · EUR 38 million in total
Part B page limit40 pages (standard application form; check your call)
TemplateWork Programme 2026–2027 application form

Expected outcomes

Projects should contribute to all of the expected outcomes. The topic says: “This topic aims at supporting activities that are enabling or contributing to one or several expected impacts of destination “Ensuring equal access to innovative, sustainable, and high-quality healthcare”. To that end, proposals under this topic should aim to deliver results that are directed at, tailored towards and contributing to all the following expected outcomes:”

  1. EO1 Patients benefit from decreased incidence of Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs) caused by the administration of multiple medications (three or more medicinal products) and enhanced health outcomes by ensuring safer and more effective use of medication.
  2. EO2 Healthcare professionals can adopt adverse drug reactions prevention and reduction strategies to integrate genetic and other biomarker information into clinical decision-making to optimise the use of medication, especially in situations of comorbidities.
  3. EO3 Healthcare systems benefit from cost savings thanks to reduced hospital admissions and other costs associated with ADRs related to the intake of multiple medicines.
  4. EO4 Clinical and regulatory guidelines and policies for medication management in case of multiple medications can be revised supported by robust evidence.
  5. EO5 Educational programs for healthcare providers and patients benefit from improved awareness and management of polypharmacy and ADRs.

Expected impacts named in the destination

The wider, long-term effects the destination seeks. Your outcomes feed them; they are not project deliverables.

  1. EI1 Health and social care services and systems have improved governance mechanisms, making them more effective, efficient, accessible, resilient, trusted and sustainable, from fiscal, organisational and environmental perspectives. This includes shifting from hospital-centred to community-based, people-centred and integrated healthcare structures, embedding technological innovations and prioritising health promotion and disease prevention and management.
  2. EI2 Healthcare providers are trained and equipped with the skills and competences needed for future healthcare systems that are modernised, digitally transformed and equipped with safe innovative tools, technologies and digital solutions for healthcare. This will involve better patient management, improved patient engagement and health outcomes, reorganised workflows, and improved resource management.
  3. EI3 Citizens play a key role in managing their own healthcare, informal carers (including unpaid carers) are fully supported (e.g. by preventing overburdening and economic stress) and the specific needs of groups in a vulnerable situation are recognised and addressed. This includes improved access to healthcare services, financial risk protection, timely access to quality healthcare services including essential medicines and vaccines.
  4. EI4 Health policy and systems adopt a holistic approach -considering individuals, communities, organisations, society- in evaluating health outcomes, public health interventions, healthcare organisation, and decision-making. They benefit from evidence based, scalable and transferable healthcare solutions (e.g. between countries and healthcare settings) including for addressing health inequalities and ensuring environmental and climate sustainability in the health sector.

What evaluators will look for in this topic

Expected outcomes

  • Projects should contribute to all of the expected outcomes.
  • For each outcome (EO1 to EO5), name who will use or adopt your results (a specific group, not “industry” or “society”), how they get them, and the indicator that shows the change, with baseline, target and date.
  • Use the topic's own words for each outcome, so the evaluator can tick it off.

What the scope asks for

Evaluators check the proposal against these sentences of the scope. Answer each one visibly, in the call's own words.

  • “Research activities under this topic should make use of the constantly improving health technologies and data analytics that provide new opportunities to address these issues more effectively, by better integrating medication management into healthcare practices, including into Electronic Health Records (EHR) and decision support systems.”
  • “Proposals should be sufficiently robust to examine differences across various populations, and also consider sex difference in drug reactions.”
  • “The further use of results generated by the projects funded under this topic should be ensured through data sharing with the relevant stakeholders and the European Medicines Agency (EMA), in view of possible adoption of deprescribing or adjusted-prescribing guidelines by relevant authorities at EU and national levels.”
  • “Proposals funded under this topic should address all the following aspects:.”
  • “The participation of start-ups, micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) is encouraged with the aim of strengthening their scientific and technological foundations, enhancing their innovation potential, and exploring possibilities for commercial exploitation.”
  • “Applicants should provide details of their clinical studies in the dedicated annex using the template provided in the submission system.”
  • “As proposals under this topic are expected to include clinical studies, the use of the template is strongly encouraged. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/glossary-terms/medicinal-product.”

Conditions that shape the proposal

  • Part B, sections 1–3: 40 pages (standard application form). Text beyond the limit is not read; tables and figures count.
  • Other Eligibility Conditions: “In recognition of the opening of the US National Institutes of Health’s programmes to European researchers, any legal entity established in the United States of America is eligible to receive Union funding.”
  • Other Eligibility Conditions: “Subject to restrictions for the protection of European communication networks.”
  • Evaluation and award: Submission and evaluation processes: “The thresholds for each criterion will be 4 (Excellence), 4 (Impact) and 4 (Implementation). The cumulative threshold will be 12.”

Impact pathway and traps

  • Users or citizens are part of the scope. Show how they take part in the design and testing, not only that they are informed.
  • Policy or regulation is in scope. Name the policy owners you will reach and what you will give them.
  • Keep outputs, outcomes and impacts apart: what you deliver, what changes when others use it, and the long-term effect.
  • For each destination impact you claim, show which of your outcomes feeds it. Destination impacts are long-term effects, not project deliverables.
  • Name the barriers outside the project (regulation, markets, user behaviour) that could block uptake, and what you will do if they do.
  • Section 2.3 (the summary canvas) is optional on this call; the old split into scientific, economic and societal impact is no longer required.
The scope, as published

While medicinal products contribute considerably to the health of EU citizens, they can also have adverse reactions. It is estimated that around 5% of all hospital deaths are due to an adverse drug reaction. On average, 16% of hospitalised older patients experience significant ADRs, varying in severity and mostly preventable, with commonly prescribed drug classes (such as diuretics, anti-bacterials, antithrombotic agents, analgesics, antineoplastics, etc.) accounting for most ADRs. Overall, ADRs increase morbidity, mortality, hospitalisations, and healthcare costs. ADRs from multiple medications contribute significantly to healthcare costs due to increased hospitalisations and treatments, making this an area of focus to achieve cost efficiency. Initial failure to recognise ADRs can generate inappropriate prescription cascades, in which the side effects of drugs are misdiagnosed as symptoms of new problems, resulting in further prescriptions and further side effects that tend to accumulate, confusing and complicating the diagnostic while aggravating the evolution. Therefore, there is a distinct need for research to help identify and prevent such prescription cascades, possibly by maximising the use of technology, as well as to improve multiple drug management in order to reduce patient harm. Furthermore, it is also possible that aside from the ADRs specific to individual drugs taken in combination, new ADRs can emerge as results from the drug combinations themselves. Research activities under this topic should make use of the constantly improving health technologies and data analytics that provide new opportunities to address these issues more effectively, by better integrating medication management into healthcare practices, including into Electronic Health Records (EHR) and decision support systems. Identifying and validating relevant biomarkers for better patient stratification can contribute to significantly decreasing the risk of adverse drug reactions. Biomarkers can also help to detect adverse drug reactions early before occurrence of clinical symptoms and enable early countermeasures. Generating knowledge on the interaction and complexity of biochemical pathways can improve the understanding of patients' response to ADRs and thus provide better tailored treatments and early responses to adverse reactions. For this purpose, any biomedical strategy that allows a better stratification of patients to identify drug response patterns in well-defined patient groups could be used, including in-vitro or in-silico models for adverse drug reactions, imaging biomarkers, drug-drug/drug-gene/drug-food interactions, therapeutic dose reduction and pharmaco-exposomics, nutrition and beverage interference, smoking, vaping, pollution etc. De-escalation studies in view of improving multiple drug management can be also considered. Proposals should be sufficiently robust to examine differences across various populations, and also consider sex difference in drug reactions. The further use of results generated by the projects funded under this topic should be ensured through data sharing with the relevant stakeholders and the European Medicines Agency (EMA), in view of possible adoption of deprescribing or adjusted-prescribing guidelines by relevant authorities at EU and national levels. Where applicable, applicants are strongly encouraged to follow all relevant guidelines in the relevant scientific fields, including but not limited to: Joint EMA/Heads of Medicines Agencies (HMA)/EC Workshop recommendations on pharmacogenomics in medicines regulation and on implementation into clinical practice. Pharmaceutical development of medicines for use in the older population, Scientific guideline from the EMA. Guidelines from the Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (‘CPIC guidelines’). Proposals funded under this topic should address all the following aspects: Leverage the role of pharmacogenomics, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in predicting and preventing adverse drug reactions in situations of multiple medications (three or more drugs administered concomitantly), and propose personalised medicine approaches, such as targeted therapies and biomarker-driven treatment strategies, to reduce the rate of adverse drug reactions and limit multiple medications. Maximise the use of technology, such as electronic health records, artificial intelligence and clinical decision support systems, to support safe medication use and prevent adverse drug reactions. Address the ethical, regulatory, and implementation challenges associated with integrating personalised medicine into clinical practice to address adverse drug reactions due to the administration of multiple medications. Generate evidence on the clinical utility and cost-effectiveness of treatment guided by pharmacogenomics and other relevant biomarkers-based approach, for single drugs and for combinations of drugs. Develop and implement strategies, including regulatory science approaches, for efficient integration of project results into daily healthcare. Align with similar work in other EU-funded projects or partnerships, such as the co-funded European Partnership for Personalised Medicine, the co-funded European Partnership on Transforming Health and Care System etc. while avoiding any potential overlaps. The participation of start-ups, micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) is encouraged with the aim of strengthening their scientific and technological foundations, enhancing their innovation potential, and exploring possibilities for commercial exploitation. Applicants should provide details of their clinical studies in the dedicated annex using the template provided in the submission system. As proposals under this topic are expected to include clinical studies, the use of the template is strongly encouraged. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/glossary-terms/medicinal-product Old age is often defined as starting around 60 or 65 years of…

Other topics in HORIZON-HLTH-2027-01

Source and attribution

Topic text from the official topic page on the EU Funding & Tenders Portal, retrieved 19 October 2026. © European Union, reused under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU (CC BY 4.0). Changes: the expected outcomes and impacts are split into numbered statements, long passages are shortened, and the evaluator checklist is GrantWise's own commentary. Your call and the Work Programme always win; check them before you submit. GrantWise is independent and not affiliated with, endorsed by, or acting on behalf of the European Commission.