Transformations in Research: Collaboration is the Key

Medicare Passes, Budget Left Unfinished As Congress Wraps Up 2003

Stars of the Small Screen: The Residents of TLC's Resident Life

A Word from the President: A Sweeping Look at the Year Ahead

Viewpoint: We Must Strengthen Our Public Health Workforce

"Portraits of Medical Education"

Reporter Archive

AAMC Newsroom

Managing Editor Scott Harris sharris@aamc.org Staff Writer Elissa Fuchs efuchs@aamc.org

Transformations in Research: Collaboration Is the Key at University of California's "QB3" Institute

This is the first installment in a 2004 series of columns highlighting new methodologies, approaches, and technological innovations in academic research.

By Whitney L.J. Howell

Luke Lee, M.D., assistant professor and QB3 researcher at UC-Berkeley, is developing a micro-lens smaller than the period at the end of this sentence.

For years medical research has been organized like a cottage industry with individual researchers operating isolated laboratories. This system has worked well for solving many of the fundamental riddles of biology. But for the big questions bedeviling modern research, many believe new approaches for organizing research must be found. One new model being closely watched is at the University of California campuses in San Francisco, Santa Cruz, and Berkeley. It's called the QB3 - the California Institute for Quantitative Biomedical Research.

Just over two years ago, with the support of then-Gov. Gray Davis (D), leaders from these three universities designed a plan to create an institute that would facilitate collaborative research in engineering, physics, biology, and other sciences. But QB3 was also designed to help fuel the California economy with various research endeavors.

"We wanted to do a 'good science thing,'" says Regis Kelly, Ph.D., UCSF's executive vice chancellor and professor of biochemistry and biophysics. "What stimulates the economy most in the life sciences is medicine, and by bringing the three campuses together, we meant to specifically interface with industry in the state." Dr. Kelly is also a member of the QB3 Executive Committee.

Separately, the schools have their own bailiwicks, Dr. Kelly says, but none are strong in all areas. Consequently, bringing the resources together provides a more effective environment in which to conduct research. Currently, some of the primary areas of interest are imaging (noninvasive diagnoses), nanotechnology (motors and sensors that self-assemble due to biological encoding), prominent diseases in the Third World, and the human genome and phenotypic coupling.

When QB3 was first established, scientists and researchers were recruited to join the institute based on their projects and their involvement in the research. Currently, there are still 11 ongoing recruitment searches. But as word has gotten out, more researchers are starting to file formal applications to participate in projects within the institute's walls, according to Marvin Cassman, Ph.D., QB3's executive director. It's a "local application process," he says, designed to focus on the advancement of quantitative research. (Dr. Cassman stepped down as executive director on Jan. 1.)

Perhaps one of the most notable projects underway at QB3 is an effort to create a searchable genomic database. The initiative links clinical-acquisition strength at UCSF to data-analysis strength at UCSC. After completion, researchers will be able to access a larger spectrum of DNA information, research, and discoveries.

In addition, QB3 is also linked to SRI International, an independent, non-profit research organization, on the PharmaSTART initiative. As part of this partnership, the QB3 works with SRI International to further research new drugs to ensure they are safely marketable and appropriate for licensing. Academic institutions aren't equipped to make drug discoveries, Dr. Kelly says, so this partnership gives QB3 the opportunity to participate in this process by testing the drugs.

When determining who works together on projects, scientists and researchers are not just partnered haphazardly. Instead, each university sends a chairperson to a three- or four-day workshop, during which they compare notes on all the different endeavors underway at each institution. Where any overlap exists, those researchers are paired together for collaborative work.

But both Dr. Kelly and Dr. Cassman admit communication between the schools is not always at an optimum level. While most of the communication is done via telephone or e-mail, nothing compares to a one-on-one encounter. Generally, the institute strives for in-person meetings at least once a week, but video conferencing has also started to take hold even though the quality of video conferencing is sub par, says Dr. Kelly. This communication problem has been a stumbling block for QB3 that it is still trying to conquer.

Although QB3 is still relatively young in the research world, it has inspired other universities to attempt the same feat. Stanford University has already expressed interest in developing a collaborative research facility of its own, Dr. Kelly says. In addition, the QB3 leadership has extended an invitation to the Lawrence Berkeley Labs, near UC-Berkeley, to join the institute and participate in cancer research. The determination of whether the labs will join QB3 will be made by mid-2004.

Overall, feedback from the medical and research communities has been very positive, Dr. Cassman says. "Everyone has been enthused about the prospect of having projects with long-term research efforts," he says. "I'm convinced that in the long run, we'll be very productive."

Contact Us    © 1995-2008 AAMC    Terms and Conditions    Privacy Statement