N※N

Tech entrants won't replace science led diagnostics, says Metropolis MD - BusinessToday

  //science-technology.news-articles.net/content/2 .. iagnostics-says-metropolis-md-businesstoday.html
  Published in Science and Technology on Wednesday, September 17th 2025 at 9:17 GMT by Business Today
          ^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

Tech‑Entrants Won’t Replace Science‑Led Diagnostics, Says Metropolis MD

Business Today – 17 September 2025
In a sharply worded interview, Dr. Anil Rao, Managing Director of Metropolis Diagnostics, warned that the surge of technology‑centric companies in the diagnostics space does not threaten the foundational role of science. The remarks come as a wave of AI‑driven platforms, cloud‑based analytics tools and hardware‑heavy start‑ups are flooding the market, promising faster turnaround times and lower costs. Dr. Rao’s perspective, articulated in the Business Today feature, offers a sobering counterpoint to the hype surrounding “tech‑first” diagnostics.

The Landscape of Modern Diagnostics

The diagnostics industry has undergone a tectonic shift over the last decade. Traditional, laboratory‑based tests—whether immunoassays, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) or next‑generation sequencing (NGS)—remain the gold standard for accuracy and reproducibility. Yet, the sector is increasingly courting the tech sector: companies such as HealthTech AI, GenomicX, and even giants like Google and Amazon are investing heavily in diagnostic platforms that leverage machine learning, Internet of Things (IoT) sensors, and blockchain for data integrity.

The Business Today article opens with a brief overview of the competitive ecosystem. It highlights that, while many of these new entrants bring advanced computational power and data‑driven insights, the “science‑led” component—biological discovery, assay design, validation, and rigorous quality control—has yet to be superseded. According to the piece, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and its counterparts around the globe have been slow to grant approvals to entirely algorithm‑based tests, often requiring a hybrid model that includes a lab‑validated component.

Dr. Rao’s Core Argument

In the interview, Dr. Rao stressed that diagnostic tests are not merely software programs; they are physical assays that must satisfy stringent analytical performance criteria. He said:

“You can have the smartest algorithm in the world, but if the input sample isn’t processed correctly, the output will be garbage. Science is the backbone that ensures the data you feed into any model is of the highest quality.”

He cited a few specific examples to illustrate this point. For instance, a recent partnership between Metropolis and a machine‑learning startup resulted in a new point‑of‑care (POC) test for detecting influenza. While the AI component successfully triaged patient data in real time, the core assay—an isothermal amplification method—was developed and validated by Metropolis’s in‑house research team.

The MD also highlighted the importance of continuous post‑market surveillance. “Unlike software that can be updated via a patch, diagnostic assays must undergo periodic re‑validation to account for changes in pathogens, such as emerging variants of SARS‑CoV‑2 or influenza strains,” he noted. This requirement, he explained, is an inherently scientific endeavour that cannot be outsourced to a tech vendor.

The Role of AI and Digital Tools

While cautioning against the over‑reliance on purely tech‑based solutions, Dr. Rao acknowledged the transformative potential of AI and digital analytics. He pointed out that machine learning can enhance interpretative accuracy, identify subtle patterns across multimodal data sets, and predict patient outcomes. However, he emphasized that these tools serve as augments rather than replacements.

The Business Today piece links to a separate article titled “AI in Diagnostics: Opportunities and Pitfalls,” which expands on how AI can be integrated with traditional workflows. Dr. Rao’s comments echo the key points from that article: AI excels at pattern recognition, but its output is only as reliable as the data fed into it. In diagnostics, that data must come from well‑controlled laboratory processes, from sample collection to reagent handling.

Regulatory and Ethical Considerations

The article also touches on the regulatory landscape. Dr. Rao pointed out that regulatory bodies are increasingly demanding evidence of both scientific robustness and algorithmic transparency. He referred readers to the FDA’s recent guidance on “Software as a Medical Device (SaMD)” and the International Medical Device Regulators Forum (IMDRF)’s recommendations for AI‑based diagnostics. These documents underscore a growing expectation that tech entrants must collaborate closely with scientific experts to meet safety and efficacy standards.

Ethically, Dr. Rao underscored the need for equitable access. “If a diagnostic platform is only available to high‑income regions or requires costly consumables, it does little to address global health disparities,” he said. The piece links to a policy brief on “Digital Diagnostics for Low‑Resource Settings,” which discusses how science‑led designs can be adapted to varying infrastructure levels.

Market Implications and Future Outlook

According to the Business Today feature, the diagnostic market is projected to grow at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 7.8% over the next five years, driven by the rise of precision medicine, the expansion of POC testing, and the continued integration of digital health tools. Dr. Rao believes that the most successful players will blend scientific innovation with technology‑driven delivery.

He cited Metropolis’s own roadmap: continuing to invest in novel biomarker discovery while partnering with tech firms for data analytics and workflow optimization. “The synergy between science and technology is where we will see the next breakthroughs,” he affirmed.

The article concludes by summarizing that, while tech entrants are injecting fresh capital, new talent, and computational power into the diagnostics arena, they are unlikely to supplant the science‑led foundation that has, until now, ensured test reliability and patient safety. Instead, the future belongs to a hybrid ecosystem where rigorous laboratory science and advanced digital tools collaborate to deliver faster, more accurate, and more accessible diagnostics.

For further reading, the Business Today piece links to:

• “AI in Diagnostics: Opportunities and Pitfalls” – a deep dive into the benefits and limitations of AI‑powered tests.
• “Digital Diagnostics for Low‑Resource Settings” – an analysis of how technology can bridge gaps in healthcare infrastructure.
• “FDA Guidance on Software as a Medical Device (SaMD)” – regulatory insights for developers and manufacturers.

Word Count: ~650 words.