| Topic | HORIZON-HLTH-2027-02-TOOL-01-two-stage |
|---|---|
| Status | Forthcoming |
| Call | HORIZON-HLTH-2027-02-two-stage — Cluster 1 - Health (Two stage - 2027) |
| Destination | Developing and using new tools, technologies, and digital solutions for a healthy society (2026-27) |
| Type of action | Research and Innovation Actions · two-stage |
| Opening | 29 October 2026 |
| Deadlines | 17 February 2027 (stage 1) · 16 September 2027 (stage 2) |
| Budget | EUR 6 million to EUR 8 million per project · 6 projects expected · EUR 44.2 million in total |
| Part B page limit | 40 pages (standard application form; check your call) |
| Template | Work 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 “Developing and using new tools, technologies and digital solutions for a healthy society”. 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:”
- EO1 Clinical researchers and developers have access to novel predictive biomarkers to guide a more accurate assessment of disease progression and treatment response and tackle the unmet clinical needs of non-communicable chronic diseases.
- EO2 Clinicians and healthcare professionals use clinically validated predictive biomarkers for implementing more effective clinical research and personalised medicine with better health outcomes in chronic non-communicable diseases.
- EO3 Key stakeholders have access to trustworthy Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools to guide the development of multimodal predictive biomarkers of higher accuracy and clinical value when compared to the established practice.
- EO4 The citizens benefit of better health outcomes thanks to improved clinical guidelines and the implementation of effective biomarker-guided clinical research and personalised healthcare.
Expected impacts named in the destination
The wider, long-term effects the destination seeks. Your outcomes feed them; they are not project deliverables.
- EI1 Europe’s scientific and technological expertise and know-how, its capabilities for innovation in new tools, technologies and digital solutions, and its ability to take-up, scale-up and integrate innovation in healthcare is world-class.
- EI2 Citizens benefit from targeted and faster research resulting in safer, more sustainable, efficient, cost-effective, accessible and affordable tools, technologies and digital solutions for improved (personalised) disease prevention, diagnosis, treatment and monitoring for better patient outcome and wellbeing, in particular through increasingly shared health resources (interoperable data, infrastructure, expertise, citizen/patient driven co-creation).
- EI3 The EU gains high visibility and leadership in terms of health technology development, including through international cooperation.
- EI4 The burden of diseases in the EU and worldwide is reduced through the development and integration of innovative diagnostic and therapeutic approaches, personalised medicine approaches, digital and other people-centred solutions for healthcare.
- EI5 Both the productivity of health Research and Innovation, and the quality and outcome of healthcare is improved thanks to the use of health data and innovative analytical tools, such as AI supported decision-making, in a secure, ethical and inclusive manner, respecting individual integrity and underpinned with public acceptance and trust.
- EI6 Citizens trust and support the opportunities offered by innovative technologies for healthcare, based on expected health outcomes and potential risks involved.
What evaluators will look for in this topic
Expected outcomes
- Projects should contribute to all of the expected outcomes.
- For each outcome (EO1 to EO4), 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.
- “This topic is expected to support collaborative projects paving the way for future innovations in personalised medicine and enabling more timely and effective therapeutic interventions.”
- “The proposals should address all the following research and innovation activities:.”
- “This should include stratification by biological sex, and where feasible, integration of gender-related variables and sociodemographic determinants that may modulate disease trajectories or treatment efficacy.”
- “To guarantee a solid and fast optimisation and training of the AI tools, the applicants should provide information in their proposal that the appropriate high-quality clinical data are readily available, and when necessary generate small-scale new data for the AI optimisation needs.”
- “The biomarkers under study should be multimodal, covering for instance molecular, cellular, physiological, imaging, behavioural and digital markers, and/or their combinations.”
- “The applicants should justify why the development of the biomarkers proposed is imperative to tackle the unmet clinical needs of the chronic non-communicable diseases under study.”
- “Proposals should have strong emphasis on the AI trustworthiness and develop the adequate performance metrics to assess their accuracy, reliability, reproducibility, including the assessment of possible inherent bias.”
- “Use of AI and dataset should comply with existing privacy-preserving legislation.”
- “Moreover, proposals should consider the development of user-friendly and fit-for-purpose visualisation and decision-support tools to guide clinicians in evaluating the clinical plausibility of the biomarkers under study across diverse patient groups.”
- “To this end, the applicants should implement clinical validation studies in independent disease cohorts, RWD and exploratory clinical studies, as appropriate, to demonstrate their clinical value as prognostic and predictive indicators for more effective clinical research and better patient health outcomes as compared to the established clinical practice of chronic non-communicable diseases.”
- “Prospective clinical studies are expected to be led by entities in the EU/EFTA and/or Associated Countries.”
- “The applicants should prioritise the exploitation of their research results in the EU.”
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.
- Two-stage submission: the first stage uses a shorter proposal and is assessed on Excellence and Impact only. Check the page limit and sections in the stage-one form of your call.
- Admissibility Conditions, proposal page limit and layout: “Applicants submitting a proposal for a blind evaluation (see General Annex F) must not disclose their organisation names, acronyms, logos nor names of personnel in the proposal abstract and Part B of their first-stage application (see General Annex E).”
- 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: Award criteria, scoring and thresholds: “The first-stage proposals of this topic will be evaluated blindly.”
- Evaluation and award: Submission and evaluation processes: “For the first stage, the thresholds for each criterion will be 4 (Excellence) and 4 (Impact). The overall threshold applying to the sum of the two individual scores will be set at a level that ensures the total requested budget of proposals admitted to stage 2 is as close as possible to four times the available…”
- Evaluation and award: Submission and evaluation processes: “For the second stage, 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.
- The scope expects pilots or demonstration. Name the sites, the partners who run them and what is measured there.
- The gender dimension is named in the topic. Show how sex and gender analysis enters the research content, not only team balance.
- 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
Biomarkers are invaluable tools for improving patient outcomes, guiding treatment decisions, accelerating personalised medicine, more effective clinical research and the development of better medicines. However, despite the scientific discoveries of many clinically relevant biomarkers, estimated on the scale of tens of thousands, only a few biomarkers have been implemented in clinical practice. The traditional ‘one biomarker’ paradigm is insufficient for addressing the unmet clinical needs of chronic, progressive and multifactorial diseases, due to the complexity of the clinical phenotypes characterised by broad inter-and intra-patient heterogeneity. The established biomarkers have limitations in their use as prognostic and predictive indicators, for the assessment of the disease progression and the choices of the optimal therapeutic interventions tailored to the patients’ characteristics. Therefore, the topic focuses on the clinical development of predictive biomarkers of disease progression and treatment response for chronic non-communicable diseases (excluding cancer) by using established AI methodologies able to combine data of clinically used and candidate biomarkers, with available data from relevant clinical studies, longitudinal and Real-World Data (RWD). This topic is expected to support collaborative projects paving the way for future innovations in personalised medicine and enabling more timely and effective therapeutic interventions. The proposals should address all the following research and innovation activities: Set-up a multidisciplinary collaboration to map and evaluate the available information and data on biomarkers currently used in the clinical setting, candidate biomarkers from past and ongoing clinical studies, which are scientifically proven as clinically relevant to the disease progression and treatment response for the chronic non-communicable diseases under study. This should include stratification by biological sex, and where feasible, integration of gender-related variables and sociodemographic determinants that may modulate disease trajectories or treatment efficacy. Adapt and apply of established AI methods rather than developing novel ones from scratch, to deliver novel predictive biomarkers of disease progression and treatment response, by integrating data of currently used and candidate biomarkers, with suitable data from available longitudinal and other relevant clinical studies, including RWD, as necessary. To guarantee a solid and fast optimisation and training of the AI tools, the applicants should provide information in their proposal that the appropriate high-quality clinical data are readily available, and when necessary generate small-scale new data for the AI optimisation needs. The biomarkers under study should be multimodal, covering for instance molecular, cellular, physiological, imaging, behavioural and digital markers, and/or their combinations. The applicants should justify why the development of the biomarkers proposed is imperative to tackle the unmet clinical needs of the chronic non-communicable diseases under study. Use AI and, where needed, other relevant data and knowledge integration methods, to describe the relationships among different biomarkers and support the robust prioritisation of predictive biomarkers tailored to the characteristics of the patients’ and their disease stage and treatment response. Proposals should have strong emphasis on the AI trustworthiness and develop the adequate performance metrics to assess their accuracy, reliability, reproducibility, including the assessment of possible inherent bias. Use of AI and dataset should comply with existing privacy-preserving legislation. Moreover, proposals should consider the development of user-friendly and fit-for-purpose visualisation and decision-support tools to guide clinicians in evaluating the clinical plausibility of the biomarkers under study across diverse patient groups. Establish a biomarker validation platform to assess the clinical utility of the predictive biomarkers identified. To this end, the applicants should implement clinical validation studies in independent disease cohorts, RWD and exploratory clinical studies, as appropriate, to demonstrate their clinical value as prognostic and predictive indicators for more effective clinical research and better patient health outcomes as compared to the established clinical practice of chronic non-communicable diseases. Prospective clinical studies are expected to be led by entities in the EU/EFTA and/or Associated Countries. Develop a comprehensive exploitation plan for the valorisation of the research outputs and a regulatory strategy to support the alignment to the regulatory requirements for the qualification of the biomarkers and/or AI tools and engage with the regulators in a timely manner. The applicants should prioritise the exploitation of their research results in the EU. Participation of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) is encouraged with the aim to strengthen the scientific and technological basis of SMEs and valorise their health innovations. Proposals should apply good practices for GDPR compliant personal data protection. Proposals are encouraged, where relevant, to exploit the available data services, expertise and digital tools offered by the relevant European research infrastructures and/or data infrastructures in the area of health funded under the Digital Europe Programme. All proposals selected for funding under this topic will be strongly encouraged to participate in networking and joint activities (e.g. participation in joint workshops, development of best practices, or joint communication activities), which may also involve networking with projects funded under Horizon Europe, or other EU programmes (e.g. the Digital Europe Programme). The proposals should allocate a sufficient budget for networking and joint activities, without the prerequisite to detail such activities at…
Other topics in HORIZON-HLTH-2027-02-two-stage
- HORIZON-HLTH-2027-02-DISEASE-01-two-stage — Innovative healthcare interventions for non-communicable diseases
- HORIZON-HLTH-2027-02-DISEASE-14-two-stage — Clinical trials for advancing innovative interventions for neurodegenerative…
- HORIZON-HLTH-2027-02-IND-02-two-stage — Portable and versatile Point-of-care diagnostics
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.