RESEARCH BY INDUSTRY

Evidence for the decision.

Find published research and synthetic demonstrations, with planned and developing topics clearly separated.

9 published public-data studies4 synthetic demonstrations51 planned or developing topics

Pharmaceuticals and biotechnology

0 published studies · 3 planned or developing topics

Planned topics & work in progress

No findings are published for this selection yet. These topics are separate from completed findings. Each status reflects the work actually performed.

S19 / Pharmaceuticals and biotechnology

Compound selection when laboratory tests are expensive

A discovery team must choose which compounds to test next under a limited assay budget. Evaluate whether uncertainty-aware selection finds active compounds more efficiently than random screening or choosing the largest predicted activity.

Planned topic

Proposed design & source

Molecular representations; uncertainty estimation; active learning

Choose a well-populated ChEMBL target and a compatible endpoint. Harmonize units, assay types and duplicate compound measurements before defining the label. Compare molecular-fingerprint models with one graph-based challenger. Run retrospective active-learning rounds by revealing withheld assay labels only after a selection.

Evaluation: Use scaffold-separated and, when feasible, publication-time holdouts. Compare random, greedy and uncertainty/diversity acquisition under identical label budgets. Report hit rate, enrichment, calibration and chemical diversity; repeat acquisition trials with multiple seeds.

Boundary: This is retrospective selection within a measured compound pool. It does not establish clinical efficacy, safety, prospective laboratory hit rates or discovery of a new drug.

ChEMBL ↗

S20 / Pharmaceuticals and biotechnology

Trial completion risk from information available at registration

A clinical-development operations team must anticipate prolonged or unsuccessful trial execution. Study whether registration-time design and enrollment characteristics predict completion timing and early termination.

Planned topic

Proposed design & source

Competing risks; survival calibration; historical snapshot design

Define a cohort by registration period and study type. Reconstruct fields as recorded at registration using accessible record history or dated snapshots; do not use later actual enrollment or revised completion dates as baseline predictors. Fit competing-event models for completion and termination, retaining ongoing trials as censored.

Evaluation: Use later registration cohorts as holdouts, allowing adequate follow-up. Compare simple phase/design strata with regularized survival models. Report horizon-specific calibration, censoring-adjusted Brier scores, event counts and sensitivity to status-reporting lag.

Boundary: Current registry records alone cannot support a leakage-free registration-time forecast. If history cannot be recovered, deliver a retrospective association study and label it accordingly; registry completion is not scientific success.

ClinicalTrials.gov study records ↗

S21 / Pharmaceuticals and biotechnology

Does molecular data add stable prognostic information?

A translational research team must decide whether a complex molecular signature adds information beyond a simpler clinical baseline. Test this increment under rigorous leakage and batch-effect controls in one cancer cohort.

Planned topic

Proposed design & source

Penalized Cox models; pathway aggregation; multi-omic integration

Select only open TCGA clinical and processed molecular files with usable outcome definitions. Start with a clinical Cox model, add a prespecified pathway-level representation and compare with penalized multi-omic survival modeling. Perform normalization and feature selection inside training folds and keep all samples from a patient together.

Evaluation: Use nested patient-level validation and a collection-site holdout if feasible. Report time-specific calibration, concordance, integrated Brier score and feature stability. Test proportional-hazards assumptions and clinical-variable missingness; identify external validation as a future requirement.

Boundary: Retrospective prognostic association does not identify treatment benefit. Open TCGA cohorts do not establish clinical utility or readiness for patient care; controlled-access files are outside this project's scope.

TCGA open-access data through GDC ↗

The 60-topic program spans 20 industries, with 9 studies published. Synthetic demonstrations are counted separately. Unpublished topics have no public case-study route.