About
Independent scientific judgment,
before trial commitments harden
With a PhD in Neuroscience and more than two decades in multi-site neuroimaging across neurology and psychiatry, I work at the interface where biomarker science becomes a trial decision. I understand the signal, but also the acquisition, processing, QC, documentation, and governance conditions that determine whether that signal can support a credible endpoint role.
I work independently, which means no incentive to oversell any infrastructure. But the more relevant distinction is structural: two decades spent across the full measurement chain — acquisition governance, processing pipelines, QC design, regulatory alignment, and endpoint documentation — means I see what no single internal function is positioned to see. That cross-chain visibility is what sponsors need before decisions harden.
Based in France · Working internationally in English, French, and Portuguese.
Neuroimaging biomarker strategy
Framing, context of use, and evidence pathways — what claims the data can realistically support.
Early-phase neuroimaging decisions
Feasibility, validation direction, and risk assessment before protocol lock.
Clinical and real-world imaging evidence
Decision-relevant endpoints and meaningful metrics that hold up under regulatory inspection.
Regulatory and device governance
SaMD lifecycle controls, change-control policy, and audit-readiness for imaging pipelines used as trial endpoints.
