Interview

Abstract

Eleni Zika is currently a research program manager at the Medical Research Council (London, UK). Previously she was a research fellow in the ‘Agriculture and Life Sciences in the Economy‘ unit of the Institute for Prospective Technological Studies of the European Commission, where her work focused on the socioeconomic impacts of biotechnology, including pharmacogenetics. Prior to that, she worked as a Christine Mirzayan Science and Technology Policy Fellow at the US National Academies (Washington DC, USA), where she performed research on the role of intellectual property in research innovation, particularly as related to genomics and proteomics. She received her PhD in Genetics and Molecular Biology from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (NC, USA). Her graduate work focused on the regulation of immunity but also on the ethical, legal and social implications of genetics.

You graduated from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill with a PhD in genetics. What led to your interest in pharmacogenomic-related issues?

Since my undergraduate studies, I have had a broad interest in bioethics and, in particular, the ethical implications of eugenics. Through my graduate training I realized that successful treatment of disease is very complicated and often highly dependent on each individual patient. My interest in pharmacogenomics stemmed from that realization, but my involvement in the study of related issues did not flourish until I joined the European Commission‘s Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS), where I had the opportunity to participate in several studies on the socioeconomic implications of pharmacogenomics as well as the potential of this area to facilitate improved health and healthcare.

Are there any individuals in particular that you have worked with who have had an impact on the path that your career has taken thus far?

There have been many people who have influenced my decisions and helped me find my way through this rather alternative career path that I have followed. My professors and peers throughout my education have played a key role in fueling my interest in several aspects of science, from genetics and evolution all the way to bioethics and policy. The first incentives came from my university professors in Greece and my PhD mentor, who helped me shape my scientific thinking, followed by my mentors and colleagues at the National Academies, who helped me discover the world of science policy and appreciate the significance of scientists‘ involvement in the development of policy. This transition from the bench to policy was further solidified during my years at the IPTS. Several of my colleagues at the IPTS played a crucial role in helping me to better understand the policy-making process and the importance of evidence-based decision making. I am grateful to all for the career that they have helped me shape.

What does your current work at the Medical Research Council UK involve?

My current role is as a Programme Manager with responsibility for methodology and population health sciences research. This is a varied role that involves being the primary point of contact for the MRC‘s customers and users related to methodology and population health sciences research. I also have to manage and administer grant applications and take forward and implement strategic initiatives within these scientific areas. A key part of the methodology work is working with other UK public and private sector stakeholders, and I am currently involved with developing an initiative around patient-reported health outcomes and identifying the methodological research priorities of the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE). Within population health sciences research, I am involved in developing the MRC‘s strategy in this area, which includes cohorts and biobanks, population research methodologies, large-scale population genetic studies and translational public health.

What projects have you been involved in that specifically dealt with the field of pharmacogenomics and/or personalized medicine?

At the IPTS, I was involved in the finalization of a study that investigated the state of the art in the area of pharmacogenomics and pharmacogenetics (PGx) as well as its potential socioeconomic impacts in the EU. In addition, I have been involved in studies investigating potential barriers for the further uptake of PGx applications into the clinic, such as intellectual property. Another important implication for PGx research is related to the availability of well-characterized samples. Against this background, I have researched, with colleagues, the implications of biobanking for PGx research and the potential benefits for improved networking and harmonization of biobanks in Europe for research. In this context, I have also been actively involved in investigating the implications of data protection legislation for genomics-based research. Most of this work has been an integral part of the biotechnology group at IPTS, which aims primarily at assessing the socioeconomic impacts of modern health technologies.

Can you briefly discuss one of your projects that you felt had the most impact on the field of personalized medicine?

One of the key projects I was involved in at the IPTS was a study of the state of the art of PGx and its potential socioeconomic impacts in the EU [1]. The study provided several novel findings regarding the research activities in PGx, as well as the industrial activity relating to PGx diagnostics.

What, in your opinion, are the major barriers to the application of personalized medicine and how could these be addressed?

The above study that I was involved in identified several opportunities and potential barriers that might influence the uptake of PGx in the clinic. Issues such as intellectual property, the limited collaboration between academia and industry, and the lack of cost–effectiveness analysis were identified as key influencing factors for the clinical implementation of PGx. Moreover, the lack of education and training seemed to be a strong barrier for implementation. The study thus provides important evidence for informing policy making in this area.

Where do you think the field of personalized medicine will be in 5–10 years from now?

The high expectations surrounding the clinical application of PGx are still largely unmet, and its potential impact on healthcare and its socioeconomic implications remain uncertain. However, several initiatives are currently underway that may help facilitate the wider implementation of personalized medicine. These include funding from the Research Framework Programme 7 and the Innovative Medicines Initiative. Moreover, coordinated research efforts through networks such as the NIH Pharmacogenetics Research Network will be crucial in helping realize the potential of PGx.

Financial & competing interests disclosure

The views expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Medical Research Council. The author has no other relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript apart from those disclosed.

No writing assistance was utilized in the production of this manuscript.