FEATURE
Interview
Big Questions,
Tough Answers:
Interview With Ned Sharpless, MD
On October 17, 2017, Norman “Ned” Sharpless, MD, was sworn in as the 15th
director of the National Cancer Institute (NCI), succeeding Harold E. Varmus, MD,
who stepped down as director in March 2015, and Douglas R. Lowy, MD, who had
served as acting director since April 2015. Previously, Dr. Sharpless was director of the
Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center at the University of North Carolina, where
he was also the Wellcome Distinguished Professor in Cancer Research. As a practicing
hematologist at the N.C. Cancer Hospital, the clinical arm of Lineberger, he specialized
in the care of patients with leukemia.
As he begins his term as NCI director, ASH Clinical News spoke with Dr. Sharpless
about transitioning from academia to government, the challenges facing investigators,
and the exciting developments in precision oncology and translational research.
What is the biggest
difference between
working in academia
and at the NCI?
The move to Washington, DC,
and severing ties with external
companies as a federal employee
were both big changes. The biggest
change, though, is in the nature of
the work. The NCI is an astound-
ingly big and wonderful organi-
zation. Running the Lineberger
Comprehensive Cancer Center
was fun; this job is unbelievably
great. The problems are significant,
but terribly interesting. Every day
is different, and I’m really having
a great time learning how federal
government works.
ASHClinicalNews.org
It’s early in your term, but
could you tell us about
your general vision for your
tenure as NCI director?
The NCI is a big, complicated or-
ganization, so I’m still in listening-
and-learning mode to understand it
better before I’m able to say, “Here
are the top six priorities of the new
NCI director.” However, the areas
where we will be expending more
effort during my tenure as director
are already becoming clear.
One is big data. When I talk
with patients and advocates, this is
their No. 1 concern. Mobile phones
can tell people about every hotel
in North America, yet we rely on
30-patient clinical trials to answer
questions about treatment choice.
Patients and advocates want more
information and larger sample sets,
so they know what to expect from
an investigational drug.
How will we aggregate these
massive amounts of information
with the goals of preventing and
treating patients with cancer? Issues
of patient privacy make accessing
the information difficult. Our next
step is mining these data for insights
about investigational treatments.
Also, as a working scientist
who ran a basic science labora-
tory for my entire career, I want to
ensure that the NCI remains com-
mitted to deepening the basic bio-
logic understanding of cancer. At
times, it feels like we’re making so
much progress in treating certain
diseases that perhaps we should
stop funding basic science. That’s
not the case. While we have made
impressive achievements and
progress in many malignancies,
we still lack a fundamental under-
standing of cancer. To continue
our forward march against cancer,
we need to fill in these gaps.
The NCI is operating in
a tight funding climate.
How do you think that has
affected progress in basic
science?
Unfortunately, in every grant cycle,
there will always be great science
ASH Clinical News
69