For those of you who read my blog last week about my young patient with newly diagnosed metastatic colon cancer, I intend to provide occasional updates.He had an infusion port placed last week, and started receiving chemotherapy. I spoke with his surgeon in some depth, and we plan to start with chemotherapy and then hope we can remove the primary cancer and the liver metastases at a future date. So far, so good.
But in one major way we are flying blind — without useful knowledge about his particular tumor’s biology that can help us truly customize his therapy and give him the best possible chance for effective therapy and cure. So, 40 years into the molecular biology revolution, we still rely upon empiricism and “clinical judgment”rather than on actionable knowledge that can drive innovation and improvetreatment outcomes. Now you know why I rant about the importance of personalized medicine as the basis for future advances.
Last Monday, I joined John Marshall and Ruth He at a dinner meeting with representatives from Medimmune to discuss possible clinical trial collaborations. One of the Medimmune representatives was Ed Bradley. I first met Ed about 25 years ago, when I was a young faculty member. I wasdoing laboratory and clinical research with monoclonal antibodiesdeveloped by Cetus Corporation, where Ed worked at the time. A delegation from Cetus visited Fox Chase Cancer Center, and at a meeting with them I was offered the chance to clinically develop either a conventional antibody or a new type of “bispecific” antibody that had never been tested in a clinical setting.
The former choice was safe and certain to lead to aclinical trial, but I had begun working with bispecifics in the lab andhad just submitted my first R01 (which got funded) to study bispecifics.So, although bispecific antibodies represented a high-risk, high-reward opportunity, I took a deep breath, selected the bispecific and in doing so, set the stage for my career as a laboratory scientist and clinical investigator. That experience taught me that good science involves risk taking, and since then I have never been afraid of new challenges, new concepts or new technologies. So, for those of you who know your Proust,seeing Ed was like biting into a Madeleine, and then being flooded by memories. It was a nice moment.
Continuing with that theme, I spent Thursday at Fox Chase Cancer Center, as a new member of Fox Chase’s External Advisory Board. I had been away for four years, so walking through the halls was a bit disorienting– both warmly familiar, but not quite the same. I saw many old friends, but I passed many other people in the halls without a flicker of recognition by me or by them–time moves on, and people come and go.
I wasn’t sure how I would feel, but I embraced the opportunity to provide assistance to so many good friends and former colleagues, and on balance finished the day feeling good about my decision to serve on their EAB. I then scurried backto DC so I could host Erica Golemis’ terrific talk as a Visiting Professor; Erica is a friend and collaborator who is based at Fox Chase.All in all, I felt as if I had taken another bite of the Madeleine.
We are all formed by the summation of our experiences, and I am genuinely grateful for all of the wonderful people I have had the privilege of working with over the years. I am doubly excited to know that every day, in countless ways both large and small, I am accumulating experiences and treasured memories at Georgetown that will no doubt be a feast of Madeleines for many years to come.