 Thank you so much for giving me a chance to come and talk to you. It's really a privilege to be here Just briefly I'll Spend a little time talking about myself my background How I ended up in the position that I've ended up and just as a way of full disclosure I've been in my current position for about five weeks now So very new so I'll share with you my perspective after five weeks on the job And and what I hope to what my hopes are in terms of what I hope to accomplish in this position at CTSI I think it's a time of huge opportunities. I hope to Engage all of you and and and because I consider the folks in this room to be a great valuable resource Community resource and helping me achieve what what I hope to achieve in this position as well So I hope to have a chance to partner with many of you in this room as well so My title is Director of Early Translational Research for CTSI and many already did a terrific job of describing CTSI as an organization and our overall goal I also have a faculty appointment in the pulmonary and critical care division and In the Department of Medicine Joined CTSI on April 26th and before Before CTSI I was at Genentech for seven years And my most recent role at Genentech was as the therapeutic area head in early clinical development for infectious diseases cardiovascular Metabolism and respiratory Before that I was at UCSF for nine years as a clinical fellow use a research fellow and And also as faculty for for For a good duration of time So just quickly I you know did my internship in residency Harbor UCLA In internal medicine did my pulmonary Fellowship here at UCSF did a research fellowship thereafter for at UCSF as well and was on faculty here for four years and Was a director of high risk asthmacotic at San Francisco Journal Hospital was at the time and I can tell you about some some of the Some of the thinking that went into my transition into industry as well, so Very basic sort of research I was doing at UCSF and and had a had a real desire to actually do something that was more translational and translational in nature and Looked around with a new CSF and interviewed lots interviewed and talked with a lot a lot of different folks to figure out ways in which I can parlay what I was doing into a translational type of research and Realize that really some of the some of the infrastructural support that would allow me to become productive in a relative short time frame was not there or at that time and so actually just Came across a job posting At Genentech which described a job that sounded right up my alley and and submitted my resume and got a call the next day And that was the extent of my job search and actually had a terrific terrific time at Genentech I initially joined Genentech to work on a molecule so my research was Focused on airway biology and cytokines related to asthma and other lung diseases like lung fibrosis Went to Genentech and worked on a molecule that had just gotten approved for treatment of asthma, which many of you may know about Zolaire initially worked on phase 3b and and Phase 4 programs and then moved over to early clinical development because really You know phase 3b and and phase 4 things were interesting to me But I really wanted to be at that place where science intersects with with Clinics the the translational space and so I moved over to early clinical development Initially worked on respiratory programs was able to broaden to include rheumatology and immunology programs and and as I indicated earlier more recently in the last several years was able to take on leadership opportunities and infectious diseases cardiovascular metabolism and and Respiratory and I think in that process got You know really it was a terrific opportunity to really learn the basic principles of drug development and and I have to say there are lots of people lots of companies that that Have many different models for how to address that translational space some Successful some less successful, and I think we've been hearing a lot about All the non success that's out there in the industry, but I think you know to the extent that That success is measured by good molecules in the pipeline. I think Genentech would be considered one of the more successful companies certainly could do better as well but so so with that You know I I was tapped to consider this position here in CTSI and and Actually the title we decided on after I decided to accept the position and the job description We've not yet written and I will be I am also tasked to write the job description as I figure out How we should prioritize the the work that CTSI does in terms of Facilitating the work that the translational researchers in this community is trying to do but a very high-level high-level Charge is to really enhance and facilitate early research efforts here by facilitating collaborative Translational efforts within UCSF so within the community here at UCSF but also to facilitate UCSF industry collaborative efforts and Then to contribute to the early translational research related educational efforts as well And this is you know, I think many mentioned it just a little bit earlier and many of you have may have seen this this article in nature from 2008 and I'll just see you know, I think you can just you can Substitute NIH There for UCSF and I think it you know it sort of conveys some of the challenges that We've been facing and I'll just read that quickly. There's no question that the NIH or UCSF excels in basic research What researchers are asking is whether it is neglect neglected the mandate to apply that knowledge outside UCSF too There is a growing perception that the enormous resources being put into biomedical research and the huge Strides made in understanding disease mechanisms are not resulting commensurate gains and new treatments diagnostics and prevention and this is you know, this is a sentiment and a belief that many from all sides not just academia is Expressing but also on the industry side as well and I think industry faces like you know that that challenge from a slightly different angle but you know, I industry also recognizes that sort of a closed container approach is not working very well and that there's a there's obviously a need to Connect to the amazing discovery science that's going on in the academic world that sometimes gets shelved The shelves are way too full of things that ought to be Getting out there and certainly I think everyone also recognizes that not all research that gets done at a university is meant to be One that gets churned into therapeutics many many things that get done are are To really primarily broaden the knowledge base and that's our UCSF core strength. So that should not You know that should not be jeopardized at the cost of trying to find the right molecules but on the other hand there are huge opportunities and with respect to discovery science that Has the potential to impact health. That's not Being capitalized on at the moment. So I think you know, we're at this really interesting place where where you know on both sides of the fence academia and Industry if you consider that the fence divides those to those two entities there's You know people have turned around to look at each other to find ways in which we can make things work better so You know people people have asked me well Why why did you take the job because I actually really loved my job at Genentech? I had a really great job and I think Why now I think those two factors that that really the world around us is changing around how industry and and academia Looks to work together and how academicians looks to work better together with each other by way of You know a lot of the things that many had already mentioned and I think you know UCSF that the leadership by way of Sue Hellman and and and and Jeff Bluestone the executive vice chancellor that there's a real will to actually make it happen and Do it well and do it right here. So, you know looking at the institution the Institute of UCSF I think there's if ever this is going to happen the this valley of death is is to be bridged I think this is all of the right elements are lined up to make it happen And if I can it would be a privilege for me to take part in that That endeavor an external to UCSF We talked about the industry and funding agencies all of that changing and philosophy as well as perspective and and And and and the work that's followed suit So Translational research in drug development. So in thinking about well, you know, how does drug development happen? You have discovery And that's what that's a huge core strength of UCSF. We do that really really well And then there's early-stage research. There's late-stage research and then and then you and then you go to early development Before you file in D. Right, and then you go to early clinical development and I'll talk about Each of those stages a little bit more but really When you're in discovery is when you really start thinking about well, why are we doing this? What's the met need? and you know, what's The need potential for this clinical indication Some of that sort of scaffolding the work some of the scaffolding to to have those conversations I think sometimes don't happen in the academic arena and then You know and then with respect to a lot of the Scaffolding that's required to get through the early stage late stage and I need to bring talk studies You can file for IND. Some of that is some of that is not set up within the academic arena to actually to support the investigator. So I'll just be waxing poetically about some of the things that I think would be really useful So early phase drug development activity discovery early stage research and late stage research target selection validation We do really well proof of activity I think UCSF and the researchers here does they do pretty well lead molecule Optimization we're not set up there are pockets of people within UCSF that probably Couldn't do that well, but we're not set up as an institution or a system to actually address that Evaluation of a mid need we have lots of clinical experts that can do that It's just that those connections with the researchers haven't happened So how do we do that better and then defining target candidate profile? So understanding what the medical a medical need is what understanding what the standard of care is Will help you to decide what kind of a molecule you need when you're still in the discovery stage so you can actually address that early on We're not set up to do that Systematically, but we want to do that better because I think you know that that really actually will enrich the potential pull of Research that can actually go beyond the lab late stage selecting lead molecule Indication selection all of that needs to happen and then defining target product profile if this were to turn into a drug What kind of a drug does it need to look like? Understanding what the competitive landscape looks like. What's the market for this and what's the reimbursement hurdle? What's the regulatory path for this this sort of indication all of that stuff all of that needs to be discussed at front That doesn't we're not again. We're not Systematized to do that up front I think it's we need to figure out a way to do that a little bit better early development clinical manufacturing Indy enabling toxicology studies regulatory filing strategy and overall clinical development strategy. So all of that stuff I think Rarely happens within the confines of UCSF But can we do better in finding the right partners at the right time to partner on some of these aspects? and I think those are all Things that would be really important for us to think about I don't think we should necessarily be in the business of Recapitulating what the drug companies do but I think all many of the many of the necessary Components to do all of this stuff. We do have within our confines some of them We don't but many of them we do we just need to find ways to make sure that the connections are happening at the appropriate time and and because Most researchers are are really so Focused on the research at hand and some that those connections aren't always happening And so how can we how can we play a part in connecting people better so that? We utilize the resources that are within our within our reach and then if those resources and those expertise Does it don't exist within UCSF? We're in an incredibly rich environment in the Bay Area to reach out and get those resources elsewhere and Who do we are we able to are we keeping a database of what's out there? And who the good partners are and how to structure the term so that we get it we are able to Create a collaboration that's that's mutually beneficial. So all of those things I think are Places where CTSI can facilitate I think I need to do that one So bridging the Valley of Death and I think you know Within the Within the academic world Translational or especially the early translational research has often been referred to as the Valley of Death and I think for Good reason because I think all of the things that I all of the different components that I talked about earlier With respect to being able to take a molecule And what it takes to take that molecule beyond the labs? Aren't there for for For easy use and so And so people spend a lot of time and energy trying to overcome those hurdles Rather than and that takes obviously takes away from the science that should be happening CTSI and UCSF as well as outside of UCSF NIH and other places and The pharma industry around us starting to address this and say in slightly different ways And I think we're starting to starting to fill in the gaps I think the gap is there's still some gaps there but we're starting to fill in the gaps and and and and trying to figure out what works what we're going to be doing a lot of sort of experimenting Exploring and experimenting to figure out which of these things meet the gaps gaps best and and what types of gaps are met best by Which of these think the programs that are being put into place, but again NIH funding with respect to Formation of CTSA is is is meant to address some of the some of the infrastructural process component of this I don't have many of you know, but Pfizer and UCSF have right now a couple of couple of Collaborations on going one through QB three and one through the chancellor's office. They're both focused. They're they're Angled slightly differently, but both are really to Really I did really to focus on identifying programs that have potential either as a diagnostic or Therapeutic moving forward and trying to trying to provide some of the support some of the infrastructural Supporting and capability support that may not exist in UCSF that that pharma does really well like molecule optimization and clinical Manufacturing that kind of stuff providing that Emering UCSF researcher with a researcher on that and to facilitate moving programs forward team on catalyst program I'll talk about a little bit more in detail in just a bit And QB three has done tremendous work in in filling some of the gap here by providing the startup garage and and and a lot of the other Expertise and consultation that they've put in place to enable budding entrepreneurs and our seed funding we talked about and many talked about a little bit You know this looks like we've met the gap, but we haven't I mean I think there's still clearly Lots of places where we're gap exists that we're we're still trying to get a better handle on and More importantly get a better better handle on how to address those gaps. So that You know, I I think is is the big challenge ahead So short-term work plan for me is I'm still in the gathering information phase again I've been here for five weeks. So I'm Have lots of meetings with lots of people around the campus who are actually directly doing translation on investigations or People who are who would touch translational Research in some shape or form to get a better understanding of what the pain points are what's working well What's not working? Well, what would really help to propel their their research that? That CTI a CTS I might be able to help with and then other institutions I'm looking around at other institutions that might do some aspect of translational research better than we do and Trying to figure out which of those things might fit it fit in at UCSF and then I'm continuing at the moment to Build external networks both in the VC industry startup and a startup companies External other academic collaborators and then you know my my goal is over the next few months to define key priorities For what CTS I is going to focus on with respect to addressing the T1 Translational needs for this for this community The moment how I and CTS I can help you we can help to identify and help facilitate potential collaborations both within UCS and external to UCSF and You know, I'm building up that The the database of what folks are doing, but but if I if there's something that I don't know I certainly can Access the folks who might know to to get you the context that you need for to help you form collaborations if appropriate and then We're here to provide early consultation for projects and programs. We have experts within that are part of CTS I but we also have lots of Industry experts that we have access to that we can connect you with as well if it's if it's appropriate for the program that you're working on and then like many mentioned there are potential funds both through way of T1 catalyst program and SOS and and and SOS and seed funding that we can direct you do if it's appropriate and Then how you can help me if you have if you have experience in in doing this at UCSF and Have, you know have information you'd be willing to share with respect to what's worked. Well What could work better? I'd love to hear it because I consider this room to be a very rich pool of information if you're aware of successful T1 programs that other CTS a's and other institutions Please let me know If you have a project or program or issue that CTS a may be able to help with please call please contact us and And contact and please contact us if there are external Collaborators that you think we ought to know about as part of our resource pool Other inputs and perspectives and constructive feedback all welcome. I again. I'm information gathering mode at the moment What will success look like when a translational research investigator experience is a hurdle at UCSF? They see CTS I as a go-to source a partner to help in finding a solution We're hoping to generate success stories As time goes on and then and then how those will be measured To be determined that but but hope hopefully will be able to share that sometime soon I think month one observations UCSF has tremendous core strength and you all know that already brilliant innovative and talented people and I was really actually you know going to a lot of these Seminars and conferences just last week. I remember the I remember seeing to myself what what a really tremendous privilege to be here because surrounded by such talented people and they're Despite the despite the systematic challenges So much amazing work is being done and can you imagine if you were to remove some of the systematic barriers the kind of work that would that would happen so Great discovery scientists deep expertise in many areas and the other thing I've been really impressed with is Despite the system systematic challenges people are figuring out ways to make things work And so there are so many so many examples of where Yes, we couldn't do this so we just got this and we went around it and people figure out ways to make things work and you know the hope is that that We're able to identify those areas in which we can actually institute changes that so that not everyone has to Spend the energy trying to go around the systemic systematic barriers that are there Key challenge current academic models not primarily designed to encourage translational research And this is you know in many different at many different layers right in terms of promotional Criteria in terms of Funding what gets fun all of that stuff But but you know I think that's part of the work that CTS I is charged to do which is changing sort of the culture of how translational research is valued and and and Done within academic institutions, so but again, I think the opportunities are huge Better trend the desire to do better translational research across the industry as well as academic institutions It's on the map Potential for new and innovative collaborations with industry partners in this area is really amazing It's enabled by government funding agencies and philanthropy. I mean I was able there. There's a There's a lot of momentum in trying to get translational research to work better Even from philanthropic organizations as well So I think that's also another opportunity that we need to we need to explore Being in the San Francisco Bay Area Bay Area. I think I if we were to have this conversation in Another place like Kansas City. I'm sure we would not draw the quality of quality of People on the expertise that we have in this room. So that's and then and then UCSF just has great component parts like everything that gets done here gets done really well It's just going to be a matter of figuring out the right connectors And then with that I'm going to I'm going to talk a little bit about the two-end translational catalyst program because I think that that some of you may be interested in hearing about it as As many mentioned it's a program that's been in place for about a year The program concept is that research technology and programs committed to seeking translation opportunities That may have a potential to develop into a new diagnostic or therapeutic entity Or possibly support identification of a novel diagnostic or therapy entity are eligible and then experts from industry academia and venture capital experiencing creating therapies and Diagnostic tests will help the researchers outline appropriate next step. So it's a customized customized Help that's provided to those who apply We seek to identify the best projects either it's whether it be diagnostic or therapeutic And bring in the missing pieces we talked about either continuum of drug development or diagnostic development and the components that UCSF has And the components that are within the UCS system system that may be more difficult to identify and access and the components that Don't exist here that we have access to in the community. So we bring in those component parts that are Not with the current investigator to try to get that investigator to be more fully resource to address all of the all of the critical issues and then We helped to leverage limited resources by identifying partnerships So T1 catalyst purpose we talked about Convening team of experts to have investigators convey the potential of early-stage research to investors The model on which this is based is a program that has existed in Gladstone Institute Led by Stephen Friedman and huge kudos to him because he helped start the program about a year ago and it's a phased approach of Providing progressively increasing benefit to the applicant. We'll talk about what that means. So The application comes in we have two cycles a year initial review Assessing attractiveness and ease of implementation and also IP potential potential for IP and then the the investigator or the applicant will get a written review of What is good? What's what's lacking? What needs a little more work and And these programs will then go go on to get a panel discussion. So panels are usually put together with With the project of mine. So the proposal that was every proposal gets a different customized panel and They'll get a very specific feedback For instance, you need to talk with an IP attorney to figure out what that is or you need to Speak with a regulatory expert to figure out what the regulatory pathway for this sort of diagnostic is and so they get a they get very specific Feedback and some hand-holding as well and then phase 3 is the consultation award. So you get a you get a Some of money to use Consultants to help round out the the pieces that might not be as complete for instance We just provided a program with a regulatory with $10,000 award to get regulatory consultation to make sure that the the regulatory pathway is Considered and and and all the risks related to the regulatory pathway and mitigation mitigation plans have been put in place and then for appropriate programs we actually Provide Development award which right now is set at a hundred thousand dollars We've had again two cycles we two cycles were finishing up our third cycle and then now Come September. We will have our next cycle. So September 28th is the deadline for the next cycle for those of you Who might be interested? It's This slide is just to just a general to demonstrate the the broad spectrum of research Programs that have come our way. So, you know, it's not strictly based on Based on therapeutics, you can see that's just a some biases was a diagnostic as was vera chip and one safe was a Diagnostic of different soar. It was trying to figure out, you know, can we do a 2d analysis of gait analysis 2d gait 2d gait analysis that helped people to To understand what their risk of injury from running is instead of the the standard 3d Which is more costly and and sometimes difficult to difficult to get so We consider a fairly wide variety of programs through T1 catalyst program. So if you have Ideas or programs that you think are sort of at that that critical juncture that you think T1 catalyst program could be helpful For please do let us know contact us even if it's before The cycle we're very happy to engage in a discussion. So do let us know I won't go over the details of these programs and Yes Yes Yes So you'll also notice Gail and I've already noticed and also, you know QB 3 also There are some overlaps and some of the programs that come through though the bi-entrepreneur Idea to IPO program with our program not a problem. I think Our program I think where it differs is we sort of do a real time We run alongside you to try to try to buy idea idea to IPO is a great program and sort of getting it if We find your thinking but we're we what this what our program does that's just a little bit different as we're running alongside you Okay, so you're here Let's figure out what's what we need to do at this point and provide you the consultation on the spot Which is different than just a one-time judging and and so Some of the programs that have come through the idea to IPO program come over to us, which is What we want to see we know that then we're addressing the different places where we're you know, we're where The the early translation programs could fall through the cracks All right seems to be stuck. There you go So Now working on enhancing understanding of the program across the campus a lot of people on the campus turns out They don't really know what T1 cattle this program is we want to make sure that that potential potential investigators who might benefit from this program know about it so we're going to be doing more work to advertise this program and We're always refining the list of consultants to make sure that we have the best people on Board so those of you who might have some folks that you've worked with in the past or some of you who want to volunteer to Consider being a consultant for some of our programs. Please do contact me and let me know and Then you know right now we're fully funded through the NIH grants, but at some point we will Actually, we're starting to actively explore Mechanisms by we can be more self-sustaining and Then solicitation from me to you would be to spread the word about the T1 cattle's program and CTSI if you have a program which could potentially benefit from aspects of T1 catalyst program Please apply or please call if it's you know if you need it today instead of waiting until September next cycle of September 2011 and Website is there If you just you know if you just search on the UCSF website first website for CTSI or T1 catalyst It all it'll lead you right there That's all I have to say and I'm happy to take questions and comments either now or later My contact information is there like look forward to working with many of you in the future Either way Yeah, yeah Well, I have a first question and I apologize I know that you've been on the job for only five weeks, but I wanted to ask if you have a first sense of what the major Problems that is the the major friction points or the major dilemmas that you see as Problems that your program is intended to address between the bridging the gap from academia to Commercialization, what are the major issues that you've identified so far? I think they're they're I think there are You know there there's as many mentioned There's a huge spectrum of research that falls under Translational or even early translational research and depending on which segment of those investigators that you speak with the pain points are very different. So the needs are Quite and even within the same segment if you talk to someone who's doing Genetics work the kind of stuff that that they would really find useful is very different from People who are doing kind of signaling work. So I so I think you know really that the the The approach has been to well, what are the common themes the common? I haven't interviewed enough people to have one common theme just yet I think one of the things that was That was highlighted was yes, there's great research going on But there isn't someone who's there there aren't enough people who have the eye to look for that Program with the potential to move forward and I think that is True and not so true there's there people who do that on campus. In fact, there are people who who's Good portion of their job is to go around and try to figure out what's going on that that that might be able to you know That has potential to move forward. I think there just are not enough people doing it. So it's not yet scaled It's not yet scalable. So I think some of that and I think really There are There have to date also been a real Real concern that there's not enough forums for that interaction for the late Late phase researcher with to interact with the early phase researchers So the things that could be bridged there's no place to have those discussions I think there are examples where that does work like cancer club I think you know cancer club is a club that that brings the the clinicians together with basic science researchers in a forum to talk about basic science research and how that might relate to clinical disease, but you know, I think that those connections aren't happening as Frequently as as one might like So I think you know, I can list I can continue to list a number of things that I've been brought up But I have to say at the moment. I haven't come up with the top three Top three gaps yet All right. Thank you So one of the things that we could so there are issues in That are big but actually dealable with that's almost There's a bunch of them. We've seen a t1 catalyst, right? And so that where we're collating the kinds of things that are coming up and the things that I've seen Include IP things some of which are really obvious, but you don't know what you don't know So that to me those are like that's low-hanging fruit So there's IP stuff. There's clinical relevance. That's come up So people know a bunch even when they are working with people in the clinical domain it seems like they've got all their eyes dotted and T's crossed and you put the right people in the room and and The question comes up. Are these people even aware of standard of care? So it's really basic again low-hanging fruit. This is all about just matching the right person to someone else That's right, and then we do I mean we work with Eric Liam is here I think hiding in the back background, but with various campus offices that really provide sophisticated help with Negotiations that's been an issue that's come up. So there's somebody who's working with a company and They just have never done this before and they don't have any guidance and one look by the right people And you know, you don't want to write that deal and you want to write it some other way Which I think in the long run is good actually for everyone Concerned so just to give you some of the I'm a basic scientist So this is my basic scientists view on the things I've learned by by watching the T1 catalyst process Question back there I don't think our charge is to turn you know researchers into entrepreneurs necessarily I think we create the framework so that good science could Turn into a business if it's appropriate without having to turn the good scientist into a bad entrepreneur So I think those that's you know, I think that's so Right so so try to identify what the scaffolding it is That it's required to turn good science Into good into a therapeutic is our charge Not what does it take to turn a scientist into an entrepreneur? The next class is going to be from bad. What is your bet good scientist a bad entrepreneur? Did you finish your question? Okay, my question is even if all these big Factors are all lined up. You have the right team the right market the right technology By the time you get to phase three 90% of this stuff is gone So even if everything looks right you still have that problem. How do you deal with that? How do you make it a stronger suit all the way along from the beginning to the end right? I think that's a great question You know if you look at molecules that are in the late-stage research phase and the typical pharma the probability of technical success of making it to making it past phase three to approval is far less than 10% right and and That's okay because those are small investments back then but you really don't want to fail in phase three So you want to do everything you can to minimize failure in phase three phase three but You can't minimize that risk until and unless you're really addressing the issue from multiple perspective early on for instance Like I said, you know the multiple perspectives that's required early on Includes clinical perspective. What's the menu? What's the standard of care? What sort of a you know? So you so what if you have a good drug in? room in in rheumatoid arthritis the standard of care is Once a week now going to once monthly injectable if you end up developing an IV drug Five years down the line. It doesn't matter. No one's gonna use it So addressing those very very simple components early on Do you know what the reimbursement hurdles are gonna be there? It's not gonna be good enough to just show that it works You're gonna need to show that it works better than what's out there right now So taking care of that Do you know what the regulatory hurdles are? Do you need to if you have these kinds of safety events in This indication is that ever gonna be acceptable knowing that and making sure that you you determine? What the what the move forward versus kill criterias are at the different stages early on? To make sure that you're not moving programs forward just because simply you're you're emotionally invested at that point making good decision criteria early on Bringing in all the different components Regulatory commercial clinical All of that early on I think is really critical to increasing that probability of technical success down the line I just I don't want to disagree with your quote because it is a good quote We don't want to turn good scientists into bad entrepreneurs, but imagine if Computer scientists had said that 30 years ago most of What's really leading this new economy is The experts being the business owners not saying that well we did our part in the lab Let's just give it to this other guy to take it completely agree I think I'm not saying all scientists would make make bad entrepreneurs I think there's some scientists who would gladly take on the role of being an entrepreneur and do it great Do it really well You know like Steve Jobs Like Art Levinson there are a lot of people who do that really well But you know our our goal isn't to take every scientist who might have it have a discovery that could become Therapeutic kicking and screaming to to forming a company if we need to help that program to move along and That scientist wants to continue to do science We are creating a framework that allows that process to happen whether or not the scientist wants to Lead the effort from that perspective So just wanted to add to that because I it made me think when you talked about you know Good scientists a bad entrepreneur and I knew you didn't mean just that they could scientists Could it would only become bad entrepreneurs and it's a good good pushback as well But what I what that made me think about is this so I have to say as a PhD scientist What I did confound was the the notion that if I wanted to push my stuff out of the lab It was sort of confounded with the thought that I was the one to do everything And I think it's useful to actually split that so in other words Are you more interested to make sure that your idea sees the light of day in terms of getting out there into the market or Do you think you have an entrepreneurial spirit and you want to nurture that and or both? So I think it's actually useful to pull those apart and I can just say that one of the things I've learned from a management perspective actually has been to dissociate my Direct involvement with my sort of high-level engagement with the outcome in the process And so I just say that that I think is actually a useful distinction for folks to make for themselves Sorry about that and I since I have a mic so I'm actually been involved with from idea to IPO for the last three years as a mentor and my background It's totally in the different areas in technology, but I've been involved with the starting three companies The interesting things about idea to IPO as maybe as a prog for them The fact that exactly what you brought the the issue that you brought up in our teams We find out there's lots of doctors and postdocs that they're not sure about They want to be a common entrepreneur or they want to be a starting your company So one of the things I actually doing this course during the whole course of the idea to IPO Why they learn is about their positions in life What it's going to take to actually start an idea a company from the idea point of view to the point that Actually you learn from selections by elimination. Maybe all these kind of molecules you're talking about Maybe you only need only on one and maybe even that one's not going to be useful because of the standard of care or whatever that The challenge is going to be so I could see that actually one of the value add from idea to IPO Top of concept and not only necessarily only that but that idea that a fact that it really brings in the different dimensions of People in the education or market segment in particular that they find their niche they find out that maybe they're really good in research and never been They don't now they're seeing the process What is going to take to get one idea from the idea point of view to a point that you have to present it to the Community of the VCs They find themselves that maybe they're really good in the researchers and vice versa some of the folks that we find out They're really good researchers that this we discovered that actually these persons could become a Potential good a person that could actually run the company and they also learn that not necessarily Starting the company doesn't mean you're the boss and in fact that the art of making deals It's much greater and they'll learn that in about Halfway through the course that the whole part of it the clinical stuff and the research is fantastic But when it comes to where the money is and how you present it It's a totally different ballgame and I think that's a growth that I see for the last three years helping with these communities As kind of a compliment to what are you doing? I could see the compliment of other courses that could help you as a deal flow basically I was just wondering what Programs or mechanisms are in place to identify unmet clinical needs that probably aren't being addressed by even the basic science labs themselves And what ideas you might have to address those needs? Just because it's one thing to translate the basic science that's in a lab But if that basic science is so far away from anything That's even a clinical reality right and you could probably go to the clinic to see very Simple right problems that don't even require a wet lab. No, I completely agree. I think you know, there's some things there's some Like I talked about like I mentioned earlier are there forms where clinicians and basic scientists can come together because how do you You know, some people how do you do research? That's relevant in some way, you know, it's so clinically relevant or medically relevant You need to put you need to bring these people that that reside in different ends of the spectrum together to provide perspective, right? So I think There are There are forms there are venues that are being created to help that interaction to occur I think for the trainees There's there there's a course called the anti-medical school that addresses that to a certain extent There is a program that's been started called Masters in translational medicine that help people to think about Think about translational translational research more broadly upfront So there you know, there are pockets of activity happening and programs that are being produced to address that But I think it really is at the level of the research and the research program where each of these things have to be Refined right these discussions refined discussions and nuanced discussions need to happen because it really it's not one size That's all in fact. It's quite not quite different than that. So you have to one recognize that those discussions need to happen and then and then and then Leviter resources to make sure that the right people sit around the table to help that discussion very very early on but I I completely agree with you that those that you know starting from identifying What the unmet need is that you're trying to address by the work that you're doing is a very very important thing to Do a front? Yeah, I just make a comment that I started at UCSF in 1973 in the Cardiovascular Research Institute and that Institute and the Cancer Research Institute and some others were formed primarily as Vehicles for funding and program project and score grants in which there were components of clinical research Based in the clinics at UCSF basic laboratory science and lots and lots of meetings There were Saturday morning meetings. There were all-day Monday meetings laboratory meetings and so on and so this Concept of having the cross fertilization between clinical relevance and laboratory is not new here. It's actually very old I think that what we're talking about is a Morphing of that type of interaction away from primarily being a grant funding vehicle and into a more business-oriented practical application The only thing I'll add is again playing devil's advocate and putting myself in my basic science shoes So one is to understand and represent and talk about the unmet needs So and and not just from a pharma or in this case an industry perspective was there You really want to talk about disease disease burden whether it's relevant to a pharma business model or not So there's that I think conveying that may have some benefits But on the other hand, I mean I really I don't think it's straightforward to think about the culture of a basic Scientist and how they might interact with that information It's not as if you know for example for myself. I wasn't interested in disease I was interested in disease, but what powered me to just to go into do a PhD It's actually I think quite different from what powers people to go into or just them to go into getting a clinical degree I went and it's all curiosity based and there's nothing wrong with that You get a lot of great stuff, but how do I convert? How do you take someone who's who's who's charged by ideas? You know that are abstract and connect them to this reality, you know this unmet need area So I think it can be done. I think it's it'll be more than just Representing sort of the the spectrum of unmet needs I think that's necessary and then after that we've got to start getting really creative and basically catching people wherever they Might be able to drop off and I can think of points in my career where were the environment to be different One could take a different path, but it's not a direct line for sure Well a very simple way to deal with that is to recreate a physical environment Have people meetings here in which you have clinicians talk about the clean the unmet need that they're seeing in the clinic and Have basic scientists do that so all it takes is people having conversations Yes, no, I think that's not an insignificant component and You know, I think I won't say genetic does everything well But what one of the things that that has been highlighted as part of the secret sauce Of the success of genetic has been the co-location So it's the people who do research people who do clinical work people who do commercial work I'll live in South San Francisco and we run into each other all the time and we can have those conversations real-time conversations to talk about talk about the project programs the overall strategy and Apparently Roche has taken that to heart because Roche As you know as a global company they're they're they have many locations But what they've chosen to do most recently is to reorganize to co-locate all of the therapeutic areas Into various different locations. So so oncology inflammation and some other groups are going to be in South San Francisco and then neurology and and Psycho a psychiatry and some other groups are going to be located in Basel. So, you know, there's I think there's something to that But I don't I don't think it's everything but I do think it's it's an important component