A successful research program requires deep integration with the clinical environment. By spending time with oncologists and nurses and joining tumor boards, scientists gain the necessary context to ask the most meaningful questions, bridging the gap between theoretical lab work and the reality of patient care.
Related Insights
Beyond scientific rigor, designing a truly effective clinical trial protocol is a creative process. It involves artfully controlling for variables, selecting novel endpoints, and structuring the study to answer the core question in the most elegant and precise way possible, much like creating a piece of art.
Experts praise cooperative groups (e.g., Chartered, Stampede) for conducting large studies and preserving samples for future biomarker research. These publicly funded efforts can address fundamental clinical questions that industry-sponsored trials may not prioritize, ultimately advancing the field.
The most valuable lessons in clinical trial design come from understanding what went wrong. By analyzing the protocols of failed studies, researchers can identify hidden biases, flawed methodologies, and uncontrolled variables, learning precisely what to avoid in their own work.
Dr. Vibha Jawa's career shows a powerful strategy: learning drug development fundamentals in large companies (Amgen, Merck) and applying them in nimble startups. This cycle across different environments accelerates learning and deepens expertise in a specialized field like immunogenicity.
Scientists in specialized roles like immunogenicity risk becoming siloed service providers. To maintain impact and growth, they must proactively collaborate with other functions like CMC, safety, and quality. This provides a holistic view of drug development and integrates their expertise into the entire process.
Dr. Radvanyi emphasizes that foundational discoveries in immunotherapy arose from basic immunology and serendipitous observations, like his own unexpected T-cell proliferation with an anti-CTLA-4 antibody. This highlights the risk of over-prioritizing translational research at the expense of fundamental, curiosity-driven science.
Successful MedTech innovation starts by identifying a pressing, real-world clinical problem and then developing a solution. This 'problem-first' approach is more effective than creating a technology and searching for an application, a common pitfall for founders with academic backgrounds.
Dr. Abelson’s career spans the transformation of clinical research from an endeavor led by a single physician-scientist to a complex industry with specialized companies for statistics, patient recruitment, and regulatory affairs. This specialization has enabled the current rapid pace of drug development.
A crucial piece of advice for biotech founders is to interact with patients as early as possible. This 'patient first' approach helps uncover unmet needs in their treatment journey, providing a more powerful and differentiated perspective than focusing solely on the scientific or commercial landscape.
The most impactful medical advances come from 'clinical scientists' who both see patients and work in the lab. This dual perspective provides a deep understanding of disease mechanisms and how to translate research into treatments, a model that Dr. Abelson believes is now under threat due to economic pressures.