eNews: November 2026

Early-career scientists who bridge clinical practice, genetics and the laboratory are shaping how medicine will use biomarkers in the coming decade. Dr. Jonas Ghouse, a physician with an MD and a PhD in cardiology who is now training in clinical biochemistry, is one of them. Based in Aarhus, Denmark, he has been recognized with the 2026 IFCC–Gérard Siest Young Scientist Award for his work on the genetics of adverse drug reactions, large-scale blood proteomics and biological variation. In this interview, Dr. Ghouse reflects on what drew him to laboratory medicine, how close we are to genotype-guided prescribing, the role of laboratory professionals, and what he hopes to accomplish over the next five years.

1. You trained as a physician with an MD and a PhD in cardiology, and you are now completing a residency in clinical biochemistry. What drew you to laboratory medicine, and how has this path shaped the way you do research?

My path has not been the most linear one, as you can see, but without really thinking about it I have always been doing biochemistry. My first research project, during medical school, looked at genetic variants and their association with QT interval. My PhD then revolved around HbA1c levels and cardiovascular risk. We studied the variability of HbA1c over time and its associations with cardiovascular disease, so we were looking at both analytical and biological variation and how they relate to all sorts of cardiovascular endpoints.

Once I realized that I was doing clinical biochemistry, I felt immediately drawn to the specialty and wanted to take an even deeper dive into what it could offer. I love the fact that we can measure things, validate them, and define what is normal and what is not. And the beauty of biochemistry is that it is also a bridge towards the clinical departments: we can communicate a result and help clinicians interpret it. That is what drew me to clinical biochemistry.

2. Your work on the genetics of adverse drug reactions is highly relevant to patient safety. How close are we to using genotype-guided risk stratification in routine clinical practice?

In some ways we are already there. There are good clinical guidelines on the use of pharmacogenetics and on actionable genes that we can use to guide therapy, and there are more associations between genetics and specific drugs, side effects and adverse drug reactions. But implementation is unfortunately uneven, and getting it widely adopted in the clinics is the big next step.

To get there, we need more prospective validation, better integration with electronic health records, and clinical decision-support tools to help interpret the results. Ultimately, we also need more randomized controlled trials to understand whether it actually improves patient outcomes. So, some of the work has been done, and we need to take the final leap, with some additional work still ahead.

One of the big obstacles right now is that if the genotype is not available at the time the drug is prescribed, there is immediately a delay. Then you have to ask who we genotype and how long we can afford to wait for that specific side effect. Either we genotype everybody, with the obvious obstacles that this entails, or it will inevitably become a biased treatment option for patients.

3. Given these barriers and limitations, what role should laboratory professionals play right now?

I think the laboratory specialties have, and should have, a central role. We know how to validate assays, we know how to define performance criteria, we know how to standardize analyses, and we know how to communicate uncertainty. Those are the core principles of laboratory medicine, and for those reasons alone this type of analysis should be directed towards the laboratory. Our role should go beyond the quality control part: it should also include interpreting the results and communicating them to clinicians.

4. Your recent work describes a plasma proteomic signature of the menstrual cycle. How do you see proteomics and other omics approaches changing biomarker discovery and reference intervals in clinical biochemistry?

It is difficult to answer in a couple of sentences, but one thing large-scale proteomics does is that, by definition, it does not look at a single biomarker at a time. In a scalable way, you can test thousands of proteins for association with a specific trait you want to study. To bridge that into the clinic, it is difficult to say that we will measure 100 or 200 proteins for a given trait or outcome. What proteomics allows you to do is boil that down to perhaps three or four proteins in combination that have a meaningful effect on the outcome. In that sense, proteomics offers a unique opportunity to look at complex diseases and complex traits and to gain valuable insights into them.

In terms of reference intervals, what we showed in that study is that something we would not expect to have such a big influence did, in fact, have a big influence. We looked at the menstrual cycle, and even in healthy young women we saw a major imprint on the blood proteome. This means that in the future we should probably take these absolutely normal physiological states into account. I am also working on menopause at the moment, and we have a paper under review in which we again see an enormous effect on the blood proteome simply from this natural transition. In the future, we need to take these natural transitions and cycles into account to better understand biology and physiology in general.

5. Much of your research relies on large biobanks and international consortia. What have you learned about building and sustaining these collaborations, and what advice would you give to early-career scientists who want to do the same?

My advice, based on my experience, is that it is all about being useful. You can contribute a phenotype, an analysis, a clinical perspective or a method. But the most important thing is a willingness to work, and that is perhaps the most important advice I can give.

Large-scale consortia are also built on different skill sets. There are people from genetics, clinical medicine, epidemiology and statistics, and everybody brings a different perspective to the collaboration. It is all about bringing your own expertise to the group and being willing to put yourself in a shift. You can come a long way with that.

6. What was your reaction to receiving the IFCC award, and what are the next big questions you hope to tackle over the coming years?

I was really happy about the award. Pharmacogenetics has been part of my research for at least five or six years, and I still do a lot of work in the field, so it absolutely means a lot to me. At the same time, I see the award as encouragement and motivation to keep going. It does not stop with the award; it motivates me even more to continue the work.

Over the next five years, I would highlight three areas. The first is moving from discovery into clinical implementation, which I think will be absolutely crucial. At the Department of Molecular Medicine in Aarhus, we are leading the efforts in Denmark to create and validate a pharmacogenetics pipeline that will eventually be rolled out nationwide into the electronic health records, so that pharmacogenetic testing can be offered to patients. That is very exciting, and I am really going to enjoy working on it.

The second is to continue working on blood-based omics. I love doing large-scale proteomics, and I hope to use this technique to identify new biomarkers that can genuinely improve diagnosis, prediction and even treatment.

The third is physiological and biological variation, particularly in women’s health. We have done work on the menstrual cycle and continue to expand it, and we have also moved into menopause, which is an important hallmark not only for women’s lives but also one that can be read out in their blood. Understanding that variation matters from both a scientific and a clinical point of view: we need to understand normal biology before we try to look for disease.

Interviewer’s Note

It was a privilege to speak with Dr. Jonas Ghouse and to learn about his vision for bringing pharmacogenetics, proteomics and the study of normal physiological variation closer to everyday clinical care. On behalf of the IFCC Task Force for Young Scientists, I sincerely thank him for sharing his experience and his practical advice for early-career scientists, and I warmly congratulate him on receiving the 2026 IFCC–Gérard Siest Young Scientist Award. We look forward to following the impact of his work and meeting him in person.

• Could you please introduce yourself?

I am Zahra Elahi, a medical microbiologist from Iran. My research focuses on the cancer-associated microbiome, particularly colorectal cancer (CRC), and on the molecular mechanisms of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). I have co-authored ten peer-reviewed publications (h-index 9; 431 citations on Google Scholar) and I serve as a peer reviewer for PLOS ONE. I am honoured to represent Iran as a Corresponding Member of the IFCC Task Force on Young Scientists (TF-YS), nominated by the Iranian Association of Clinical Laboratory Doctors (IACLD).

• Could you share a bit about your background?

I am a biologist by training, with a laboratory-science and microbiology background. I completed a BSc in Laboratory Sciences at Gonabad University of Medical Sciences (2016–2019) and an MSc in Microbiology at Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran (2020–2023). My laboratory work combines molecular diagnostics and clinical microbiology: I collected 100 paired CRC tissue and adjacent-normal samples and optimised TaqMan real-time PCR assays to relate the abundance of Lactobacillus, Firmicutes, Bifidobacterium, Clostridium and Enterococcus to tumour staging in Iranian patients (Heliyon, 2023). I also work in evidence synthesis, including systematic reviews and meta-analyses on mgrB mutations in colistin-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae (Frontiers in Microbiology, 2024) and on antibiotic resistance in Stenotrophomonas maltophilia (Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials, 2024).

• What is your current role in the lab?

I currently work as a Research Expert in the Research and Technology Deputy of Torbat Heydariyeh University of Medical Sciences. My daily activities include conducting research on clinical pathogens, microbiome dysbiosis and AMR; leading systematic reviews and statistical meta-analyses (using SPSS and R); and drafting and coordinating manuscripts with multidisciplinary teams for international journals. I also contribute to the scientific community through peer review, and I have presented my CRC microbiome findings at the 24th International Congress of Microbiology of Iran (2023) after serving on the executive committee of its 23rd edition (2022).

• Could you give us a brief introduction to your national society and its main activities?

The Iranian Association of Clinical Laboratory Doctors (IACLD) is the national professional and scientific association of clinical laboratory specialists in Iran, and it is Iran’s link to the IFCC. It promotes the quality and professional standing of laboratory medicine, supports continuing education and scientific exchange among laboratory professionals, and represents the Iranian laboratory community in international forums. My own role in this framework is to act as the IACLD-nominated liaison between young Iranian laboratory scientists and the IFCC TF-YS.

• Can you highlight some of the key activities that you had with the IFCC TF-YS?

As a Corresponding Member, my main activities are to serve as a communication bridge between the TF-YS and young laboratory scientists in Iran: sharing information on IFCC and TF-YS initiatives and educational opportunities, encouraging early-career colleagues to participate, and conveying the needs and perspectives of Iranian young scientists to the Task Force. I regard this interview as part of that engagement, and I look forward to contributing more actively to TF-YS projects.

• Did you participate in an exchange programme in your career?

Not yet. My training to date has been in Iran, although international collaboration, publication in international journals and peer review have kept me closely connected to the global scientific community. I am now actively seeking a fully funded PhD position abroad in the field of the cancer-associated microbiome and AMR, and I consider exchange and mobility programmes essential for young scientists to acquire new methodologies, build networks and bring best practice back to their home institutions.

• How can YS from your national society get additional information about the activities of the association and the TF-YS?

Young scientists can follow the announcements and events of IACLD, consult the IFCC website (www.ifcc.org), including the TF-YS pages, and read IFCC eNews. They are also very welcome to contact me directly as the Corresponding Member for Iran; I will gladly guide them towards the available activities and opportunities.

• Is there any future collaborative project of the IFCC TF-YS that you want to share with readers of IFCC eNews?

I would encourage readers to follow IFCC eNews for upcoming TF-YS initiatives. From my own perspective, I would welcome collaboration among young scientists across IFCC member countries, particularly on microbiome-based diagnostics, AMR surveillance and multi-country systematic reviews and meta-analyses, which are well suited to international, low-cost and inclusive teamwork. I thank the TF-YS for the opportunity to share my experience with the IFCC community.

• Could you please introduce yourself?

My name is Tuba Çakmak Ercan. I am a medical biochemistry specialist from Türkiye and currently work at Amasya Public Health Laboratory. I am interested in clinical biochemistry, laboratory quality, reference intervals and data analysis. I also like being involved in activities for young laboratory professionals.

• Could you share a bit about your background?

I graduated from Istanbul Faculty of Medicine and worked as a medical doctor before starting my residency in Medical Biochemistry. I completed my residency training in İzmir and became a specialist in 2026. During my training, I was involved in routine laboratory work, quality management and research, especially in reference intervals and laboratory data analysis.

• What is your current role in the lab?

I currently work as a medical biochemistry specialist at Amasya Public Health Laboratory, which operates under the Ministry of Health. My daily work includes reviewing and validating laboratory results, monitoring internal and external quality control, and overseeing routine laboratory work. I am also involved in reagent and stock management, solving analytical problems and supporting the training of students and laboratory staff.

• Could you give us a brief introduction to your national society and its main activities/the activities you have in your national society?

The Turkish Biochemical Society organizes both in-person and online activities, including congresses, educational webinars and scientific articles for people working in laboratory medicine. I am one of the founding members of the society’s Young Specialists and Residents Group. Our group takes part in both social and scientific activities and also plans new events and webinars for young colleagues. We try to improve communication and bring young members together.

• Can you highlight some of the key activities that you had with the IFCC Task Force-Young Scientists?

I am a new Corresponding Member, so I am still at the beginning of my activities with TF-YS. I have started joining the meetings and following the group’s activities. Last year, our young members group participated in IFCC Global Med Lab Week. Preparing the video was one of the activities I enjoyed the most, and we were very happy that it received third place.

• Did you participate on an exchange programme in your career?

Yes. Last year, I participated in the EFLM LabX exchange programme in Prague at the First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and the General University Hospital. I had the chance to observe different laboratory practices, especially in preanalytical processes, clinical chemistry and coagulation. It was also very interesting to experience my profession in another country, even for a short time. Socially and culturally, it was a very different and valuable experience for me.

• How can YS from your national society get additional information about the activities of the association and activities with the TF-YS?

Young scientists can follow the Turkish Biochemical Society’s website and social media accounts for announcements and upcoming activities. We also share TF-YS announcements and opportunities within our Young Specialists and Residents Group.

• Is there any future collaborative project of IFCC TF-YS that you want to share with readers of IFCC eNews?

One upcoming activity I would like to mention is the 5th IFCC Forum for Young Scientists in New Delhi during IFCC WorldLab 2026. It will bring young laboratory professionals from different countries together for scientific activities, networking and sharing experiences. By the time this interview is published, the event may already have taken place. Even so, I would encourage young scientists to follow TF-YS, especially on social media, to keep up with new activities and opportunities.

• How long have you been associated with the IFCC?

My initial contact with the IFCC began around 15 years ago.

After joining Roche as a technical lead in R&D immunoassay development, I became responsible for bone markers, with a particular focus on Vitamin D and PTH. At the time, LC-MS/MS was gaining momentum as the gold standard for Vitamin D measurement. Drawing on my background with this marker, I joined the IFCC Working Group on the Standardization of PTH and Vitamin D as an active member. This role offered invaluable insights into standardization and metrological traceability. The Working Group has turned into a Committee that covers a broader range of bone marker topics, and it remains a great privilege to contribute to its ongoing work.

In 2022, I was invited to apply for the position of Corporate Representative on the Scientific Division (SD) Executive Committee. I was truly honored to be appointed in early 2023, and in 2026, I began my second term. In this role, I serve as the primary liaison for all IFCC corporate members active within the Scientific Division, offering unbiased industry support to advance our common goal: improving diagnostics and patient outcomes. My responsibilities include evaluating the outcomes of SD initiatives, keeping oversight of all active working groups and committees through biannual SD meetings, and, most importantly, collaborating closely with the Task Force of Corporate Members (TF-CM).

• What inspires you to get more involved?

There are two major aspects of involvement that inspire me.

First, it significantly contributes to my personal and professional growth. Both at the operational working group level and at the strategic SD level, I collaborate with leading experts and scientists. I thoroughly enjoy these scientific discussions and deeply value gaining insights into routine diagnostics, as well as understanding the daily challenges our customers face.

Second, and perhaps most inspiring, is the role of Corporate Representative itself. In this position, I serve as a vital bridge between the SD and the TF-CM. While it carries substantial responsibility, it is also a privilege that reflects strong mutual trust and collaborative spirit between both communities.

• What do you like most about your involvement with IFCC?

Without a doubt, interacting and collaborating with inspiring individuals from diverse backgrounds who share the same goal: advancing laboratory medicine and improving patient care. Over the years, these professional relationships have evolved into lasting friendships, creating a genuine sense of family.

I also greatly value the opportunities I have had to participate in JCTLM workshops, where I can share the IVD industry perspective on needs and challenges and also contribute to strategic discussions on the implementation and long-term sustainability of standardization.

• What advice would you give to other Corporate Members?

Get involved and actively engage with the IFCC community, whether through the TF-CM or dedicated Working Groups. It is truly inspiring to watch competitive boundaries fade away as corporate members unite with a shared team spirit. True standardization can only be achieved when we align and pull together, which requires open exchange and active participation. I encourage everyone to step forward—your voice truly matters.

• Is there anything else you would like to add before we close this interview?

I would like to reiterate how grateful and honored I am for the opportunity to be part of the IFCC community and to serve as Corporate Representative within the SD. Every connection, exchange, and shared moment has been a meaningful contribution to my personal and professional development.

I would also like to highlight the outstanding dedication of everyone in the IFCC family, especially the members of our Working Groups. Standardization is a long journey, and I am constantly impressed by the Working Group Chairs and members who generously devote their personal time to drive these endeavors forward. Let us celebrate these efforts and work together to bring them to fruition.

Magnesium plays a critical role in more than 300 physiological and metabolic processes, yet magnesium deficiency often remains underrecognized in clinical practice. Symptoms can be non-specific, and traditional laboratory reference intervals are infrequently derived from validated against local populations. Recognizing this important diagnostic gap, an integrated care team at Emilio Ribas Medicina Diagnóstica Brazil developed a data-driven approach to establish population-based serum magnesium reference intervals to help improve the identification of patients who may otherwise go undiagnosed.

An impressive population dataset of 144,823 serum magnesium test results collected between 2022 and 2024 and subsequently analyzed to derive population level reference intervals that more accurately reflect the health characteristics of their patient population. Thereafter, three diagnostic approaches were compared; 1) manufacturer package insert reference intervals (1.3–2.7 mg/dL), 2) literature-based intervals (1.7–2.4 mg/dL), and 3) newly established population-based intervals (1.6–2.4 mg/dL). Analysis revealed that serum magnesium concentrations declined consistently with age, highlighting the importance of considering population-specific characteristics when interpreting laboratory results. Notably, only 0.5% of individuals reported magnesium supplementation, suggesting a substantial opportunity to identify untreated deficiency.

Implementation of the population-based reference interval significantly improved diagnostic performance. The updated reference range increased detection of hypomagnesemia from 0.2% to 2.1% of tested individuals, identifying 1.9% more patients with magnesium deficiency and achieving a ten-fold improvement in detection compared with traditional package insert-based intervals. The greatest impact was observed among older adults, a population particularly vulnerable to the consequences of magnesium deficiency. Using the new reference interval, 2,269 patients over the age of 60 were identified with previously unrecognized hypomagnesemia, representing more than 73% of newly diagnosed cases. This earlier recognition enables clinicians to intervene before complications develop, including impaired glucose regulation, cardiovascular instability, arrhythmias, and other age-related health concerns.

The initiative also improved identification of elevated magnesium levels. Following adoption of the population-based upper reference limit, 2,796 patients who had previously been classified as normal were reclassified as hypermagnesemia, allowing for more targeted clinical evaluation and monitoring. Beyond the analytical improvements, the project strengthened collaboration between the laboratory and clinical teams. According to laboratory leadership, implementation of locally validated reference intervals increased clinician confidence in laboratory-guided diagnoses of both hypo- and hypermagnesemia, while fostering a shared commitment to improving patient care and healthcare quality.

This initiative demonstrates the power of laboratory medicine for advancing patient care through data-driven innovation. By leveraging a large-scale population dataset to establish clinically relevant reference intervals, the team transformed a routine laboratory test into a more effective tool for identifying at-risk patients. Their work highlights how laboratory-led quality improvement efforts can enhance diagnostic accuracy, support earlier intervention, and improve patient wellness across entire populations.

For their efforts, this team received 2026 recognition of Achievement in association with the UNIVANTS of Healthcare Excellence Awards. Congratulations to Adria Gadelha Ferreira dos Santos, Medical Student, Lais Farias Masullo, Head of the Laboratory Research & Development Center, Waneska Nobre, Quality and Patient Safety Coordinator, Sandra Santos, Coordinator, Clinical Laboratory, Rachel Petrola Jorge Bezerra, Physician Clinical Pathologist and Laboratory Director.

To learn more about this best practice and others recognized through the UNIVANTS of Healthcare Excellence Awards, visit www.univatshce.com.

The XXIV International Serbian Congress of Medical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicine was held in Belgrade from 23 to 25 September 2026, continuing a long-standing tradition of bringing together experts, researchers, educators, and laboratory professionals from the region and abroad. Organized by the Society of Medical Biochemists of Serbia and the Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Belgrade, and supported by IFCC, EFLM, BCLF, and national ministries, the Congress reaffirmed its position as the leading scientific event in laboratory medicine in Southeast Europe.

This year’s Congress gathered 170 participants from several countries, with the majority coming from Serbia, followed by Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Montenegro, Turkey, Finland, and Belgium. The scientific program featured 47 invited speakers representing nine countries, including Serbia, Croatia, Italy, Greece, Turkey, Finland, Montenegro, and Bosnia and Herzegovina. The breadth of international participation underscored the Congress’s growing regional and European relevance.

The overarching theme, “Laboratory Medicine as a Pillar of Healthcare: Meeting the Challenges of Science and Practice,” framed a comprehensive three-day program addressing current scientific advances, emerging technologies, regulatory developments, and clinical applications across the spectrum of laboratory medicine. The Society’s Award for Excellence was presented to Prof. Ana Maria Šimundić, one of Europe’s most influential leaders in laboratory medicine, in recognition of her outstanding international contributions to quality improvement, standardization, and professional advancement worldwide. In parallel, the prestigious Milica Marković Fund Award was bestowed upon Prof. Svetlana Ignjatović, whose extensive scientific, educational, and professional work has profoundly shaped the development of medical biochemistry in Serbia and the wider region. Together, these awards symbolically connected global excellence with national achievement, reaffirming that Serbian laboratory medicine stands shoulder to shoulder with international standards and leaders.

Beyond its scientific content, the Congress stood out for its exceptional organization, professional atmosphere, and the strong sense of community it fostered among participants. The combination of international patronage, multidisciplinary sessions, poster presentations, and structured discussions created an environment conducive to learning, networking, and the exchange of ideas. Belgrade, with its unique cultural heritage and welcoming spirit, once again proved to be an excellent host.

The XXIV International Serbian Congress of Medical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicine concluded with a strong sense of accomplishment and optimism, reaffirming its role as a central meeting point for laboratory professionals in the region and a respected contributor to the international scientific community. Its success reflects not only the dedication of the organizers and speakers but also the collective commitment of all participants to advancing laboratory medicine as a pillar of modern healthcare.