Your colleague mentions an interesting biomarker in a team meeting. Someone says "we should look into that."

Three months later, no one remembers who was supposed to follow up.
Sound familiar?

Early-stage teams are full of smart people with good biomarker ideas. But without a system, those ideas either:
→ Get ignored (and you miss opportunities)
→ Derail your strategy (because someone champions them at the wrong time)

I solve this with a **Biomarker Watchlist**.

Everyone logs emerging biomarkers and (and tech) onto the watchlist:
✅ What type of biomarker is this? (predictive, PD, resistance, surrogate response)
✅ How would this impact our program?
✅ What's the probability of technical success?
✅ What resources would we need?

Then we review it regularly.
Not obsessively. Just systematically.

What this does:
✓ Respects your team's expertise
✓ Keeps everyone educated on biomarker rationale
✓ Ensures you evaluate emerging science as it unfolds
✓ Prevents the "wait, weren't we going to test that?" panic

The strongest biomarker strategies don't just pick the obvious winners and leave it there.
They evaluate everything—then choose with conviction.