Chapter 11: Clinical and Research Pioneers and a New Model of Collaborative Science
Files
Identifier
MendelsohnJ_01_20050103_C11
Publication Date
1-3-2005
City
Houston, Texas
Interview Session
John Mendelsohn, MD, Oral History Interview, January 03, 2005
Topics Covered
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center - Overview; Overview; Research; Definitions, Explanations, Translations; Discovery, Creativity and Innovation; Discovery and Success; On Research and Researchers; Professional Practice; The Professional at Work; MD Anderson History; MD Anderson Snapshot; Understanding Cancer, the History of Science, Cancer Research; The History of Health Care, Patient Care
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License.
Disciplines
History of Science, Technology, and Medicine | Oncology | Oral History
Transcript
James Olson:
: Can I ask a question about [Jordan] Gutterman [oral history interview]? We finished interviewing him. There seemed to raise your blood pressure a bit with Gutterman.
John Mendelsohn, MD:
: Yeah, it does cause he’s so smart and good. He’s so isolated by choice. He doesn’t participate in any collaborative work except his own. And in the 80s he was very important in interferon. It’s an exciting story. And before interferon was produced using molecular common[?] technology, I think more research was going on with interferon here than anywhere because philanthropy was put in and interferon had to be extracted from white cells. Gutterman was the conductor of that orchestra and did a fabulous job. In the past ten or fifteen years since the interferon story --because interferon was made with a common[?] technology was available to everybody a lot of people began contributing thorough care was part of the international effort. [redacted] Dr. Kripke and I and the executive committee have put more and more emphasis on the importance of collaboration and cooperation because cancer is so complicated. The heroic genus hiding in his or her laboratory and doing something that is going to change everything is a dream of the past. We’re trying to figure out how to build that more into our evaluation systems, and we have whole leadership training programs to encourage the various clinical leaders and the administrative leaders to emphasize that collaboration will take weeks … To get consensus, if you’re going to get collaboration it’s got to be through consensus. Whereas if it’s an individual doing something, you just convince them to do it, they go do it, and you don’t have to worry about getting everyone else to have consensus on it.
James Olson:
: So his plight[?] As a historian, we’re writing about a lot of people in this book, His story at MD Anderson is really about interferon and the 80s and that’s kind of it then.
John Mendelsohn, MD:
: From my point of view there may be others, you’re the historian so you may dig up something tell me about it. But I don’t see him having an important impact since interferon even though the original research projects, the one he’s doing now, he will tell you its gonna cure all kinds of cancer.
James Olson:
: He did.
John Mendelsohn, MD:
: He is immodest. It may or may not and we’re encouraging him to continue that but he doesn’t have any peer reviewed funding for it that I know of. He hasn’t convinced his peers of this or if he does its modest. Most of his money comes from the Clayton Foundation. And he’s certainly convinced them that he’s a smart guy and they should back him and they’re probably smart to back him. But if you collecting people that are going to make an imapact on cancer the top ten in this institution, we wouldn’t be in it.
James Olson:
: Who would?
John Mendelsohn, MD:
: Gordon Mills, because of his work in molecular diagnostics. Along with Stan Hamilton. Josh Fidler because of his understanding of how the cancer cell interacts with environment around it which gets into metastases and angiogenesis. John Issa because of his understanding of how genes can be modified not only by mutation but by methyl groups. And methylation and demethylation of genes it turns out that a lot of the gene abnormalities in cancer are not mutations, it’s turning them on or off, and he’s an expert at that and is pushing that field forward. And Jeff Muldrum[?] who developed the only vaccine that I know of that’s cured cancer patients. At least eliminated the disease in advanced cancer. And his, the man running the immunology program is [Wong Jin?] Liu, he as a tremendous vision of how people like Muldrum and Muldrum’s key player in his team. It’s a team effort. Harness the system. He’s going to make a great impact. Scott Lippman, the area of chemoprevention. He probably knows more about it that anyone in the country. Now him and a man named Waun Ki Hong [oral history interview] who was his mentor the two of them area. They’re obviously going to be disappointed about the Cox tube but they have the vision. If chemoprevention works some day, they’re going to be in the history books having treated.
John Mendelsohn, MD:
: Let’s see.
James Olson:
: Let’s sort of look ahead.
John Mendelsohn, MD:
: Dr. Cox [oral history interview] was proton therapy. There’s no one person here in targeted therapy, but if you – let’s say – let me give you the name of (inaudible) I think our leukemia program is (break in audio) in how to treat leukemia. Let me give you the name of Richard Chaplain, he runs the bone marrow transplant program. He pioneered the idea that the way the bone marrow transplant works is that the immune cells in the transplant go kill the tumor. The paradigm when he started bone marrow transplantation was pioneered in Seattle. You take some bone marrow and put it in the fridge or you get it (break in audio) which has been killed along with the treatment. Now the approach to bone marrow transplantation is using the donor’s cells to kill the tumor. It’s called a mini transplant because you don’t give a high enough dose of chemo to try to kill the whole tumor, which won’t work anyway in the solid tumors. You give enough chemo so that the immune cells in the bone marrow transplant go and kill the tumor. That’s Chaplain. It’s being used all over the country, this approach. He pioneered that. He’s way ahead of Gutterman on that list. Let’s see who else. [Christopher] Logothetis in prostate. Is probably the best prostate cancer doctor on the planet. [Hagop [Kantarjian] comes close in leukemia but Logothetis is the best. His approach, which he learned a lot from Fidler and other people, on how to study the biology of the tumor and take new treatments and tailor them to the biology of the individual’s tumor --which I talk about in theory with that big medicine chest-- he’s doing it in practice in prostate cancer. And Michael Milken comes to him to know what to do next in his prostate cancer. This is pioneering work, how to approach prostate cancer. Very important. I’m just trying to think if there’s anything I’m leaving – our brain tumor program is probably the best in the country, but I can’t give you an example of a breakthrough other than that technically they’ve used everything that’s available.
James Olson:
: My last question was the cure for me.
John Mendelsohn, MD:
: I think it will be a combination of radiation and some better drugs. But I’m trying to think of any others. I guess those are some of the main leaders where Anderson are going to take the lead. The six represented in the south campus and some of the others I’ve told you about. And prevention. We are contributing importantly to understanding how to prevent smoking, which is an addiction, and the whole area of health disparities research we’re starting a new area in. I think the whole area of prevention has got to be more important, not just early detection but prevention. And the kind of research that one needs to do that, we are pioneering along with other places, so I think Dr. Levin [oral history interview] (inaudible) –
James Olson:
: So I have to interview them.
John Mendelsohn, MD:
: Those 10 people we just listed are important. I am glad you interviewed Gutterman historically. I mean, in the 80s if you asked people who are the 10, it would have been Freireich [oral history interview] for what he did in developing treatment of leukemia, and the platelets you need to do it, and a lot of the infrastructure you need to do it today. Gutterman would have been on the list. And other people here can give you better answers than me because they were. Not in the 1990s and 2000s for Gutterman as being a thought leader and being a person likely to treat cancer, but he’s a terrific salesman. All of these people are stimulating people. You’re going to enjoy talking to them. If you spend a half hour or an hour with them. I don’t know where you’re at on your timeline.
James Olson:
: I haven’t talked to Kripke [oral history interview] yet.
John Mendelsohn, MD:
: That’s important.
James Olson:
: How about Louise Strong [oral history interview].
John Mendelsohn, MD:
: Louise Strong, of course, has been here since 1970. We’re talking – here I’m talking about genetics being important to cancer. She was on some of the original papers about genes that cause cancer. She was on some of the original papers. The retinal blastoma gene and the Wilms tumor, and she’s a national leader in detecting the genes that cause cancer. But what’s happened is that her approach, which is epidemiological, has been (break in audio) of all technology that’s been developed, where we can search for genes with new technology. Coincidentally, Cox can point out that (break in audio) radiotherapy with (break in audio) has been on the lead in the 70s when most surgeons in this country were chopping off breasts and everything around them. Our surgeons here were willing to cooperate with radiotherapists and pioneer the idea that mammography is important. Getting rid of radical mastectomy is important. Prevention. I think we were on prevention. Boy that was a hell of a digression. I can’t reconstruct it.
James Olson:
: How about, I can’t pronounce the name, is it [Decombruge?]?
John Mendelsohn, MD:
: [Decombruge?], yeah. He’s probably our most distinguished basic scientist. We’re giving a big (inaudible) for him next months. He built our molecular genetics department, and his own research now has gotten into the factors that stimulate bone formation. He’s a clinician by training, but then went on to become a molecular geneticist. (break in audio) I think he’d be good to give you a perspective and he’s been here a long time and watched our molecular genetics program. And he’s a wonderful, articulate person.
Recommended Citation
Mendelsohn, John MD, "Chapter 11: Clinical and Research Pioneers and a New Model of Collaborative Science" (2005). Interview Chapters. 1453.
https://openworks.mdanderson.org/mchv_interviewchapters/1453
Conditions Governing Access
Redacted
