A CRA reviewer is, in essence, testing three things: was there a genuine scientific or technological uncertainty, was the investigation systematic, and did the work seek to advance knowledge rather than simply apply it. Medical research often satisfies all three, but only if the documentation says so plainly.
Reviewers are not scientists in your field, and they should not have to be. A strong claim translates specialised work into a clear account of what was unknown, what was tried, and what was learned.
When a claim is built this way from the start, a review becomes a formality rather than a threat. That is the standard every Mitras claim is prepared to.