Chapter 14: Establishing a New Research Focus: Experiments, Money, Organization

Title

Chapter 14: Establishing a New Research Focus: Experiments, Money, Organization

Files

Loading...

Media is loading
 

Description

Dr. Gutterman then speaks at length about the intricacies of setting up his new research program. He describes his new collaboration with botanist Dr. Charles Arntzen at (the Biodesign Institute at the University of Arizona?) and the Clayton Foundation's role in financing his research. During the next half hour he details how he was invited to study desert plants in Tuscon. He believed that these plants must contain substances that protect them from UV light and dehydration, and that might be helpful in combating cancer. He describes the long process of making extracts from the plants and the studies that revealed that one extract, from the acacia victoria, would kill ovarian cancer cells (and not kill normal cells). He talks about the process of finding a lab to make a pure extract (needed in the late nineties), a goal achieved in October of 1998: "Now I have to learn chemistry," Dr. Gutterman recalls saying. He and colleagues successfully mapped the chemical structure of the active terpinioid and then embarked on discovering the mechanism of its action. Near the end of this section he talks about how they named avicin and applied for the patent, awarded in 2002. (This session ends abruptly, due to Dr. Gutterman's throat irritation from allergies.)

Identifier

GuttermanJ_03_20120419_C14

Publication Date

4-19-2012

Publisher

The Historical Resources Center, The Research Medical Library, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center

City

Houston, Texas

Topics Covered

The Interview Subject's Story - The Researcher; The Researcher; Personal Background; Professional Practice; The Professional at Work; Overview; Definitions, Explanations, Translations; Patients; Discovery and Success; MD Anderson History; Business of Research; On Philanthropy and Volunteerism

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 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

Jordan Gutterman, MD:

We also got a big grant from one of the real success stories in biotech, from Boston Millennium, another grant working on diagnostic stuff, so I was staying very busy when he announced all this. Then one day Charlie called me up on the phone. This is a free-standing research institute on the Cornell campus, which is quite a stunning campus. And he said, “The institute owns an arboretum in the middle of the Arizona desert between Phoenix and Tuscan, closer to Phoenix.” And I remember his words. He said, “Some crazy botanist had collected seeds from desert plants from throughout the world, and most of these trees and plants and so forth were growing in the arboretum, and then he was also growing down at the University of Arizona in Tuscan because they had kind of a center there to grow these things.” He said, “Would you be interested in studying the body parts of these plants?” And I said, “Let me think about it.” It sounded pretty interesting, but I didn’t know anything. I mean, I—you know—I’m a hematologist, and I had a lab. I knew how to do self-culture work and stuff, but working on plants and chemistry and isolation—I mean, that’s—so I thought about it and did some reading. I realized that desert plants were initially looked at in the birth control days. I think the Mexican yam is in the desert. That was the basis of the birth control pills by [Dr. Gregory] Pincus and the company called Syntex. But in general, desert plants have been sort of ignored for rain forest plants, so this sounded interesting. Then I thought about this. What are the stresses that desert plants have to deal with? They have to deal with ultraviolet stress—I mean—huge out there in the desert. So they must have interesting chemicals that deal—you know—we have skin cancer and aging overnight, also dehydration. So I called him up, and I said, “Yeah.” He said, “You know, there’s a natural product chemist named Joseph—” sorry.

Tacey Ann Rosolowski, PhD:

Sure. Okay, we’re good. Joseph Hoffmann.

Jordan Gutterman, MD:

So he and I met in Tuscan, and we went over to see Joe, who unfortunately passed away a few years later. He was a marvelously mild man. But he had a lot of problems. He was severely allergic. I can appreciate this. He had asthma and all sorts of allergies. He also had just undergone a divorce. His first wife—I think he remarried—they had a daughter. His first wife is a very well-known writer, and I’m forgetting her name right now. She has written a book on nutrition with her daughter Camilla. I can’t remember her name right this second. It’s not someone I’ve read. I see her books all over the place. So he was having severe—you know—he was just going through a lot of personal stuff—a wonderful guy. He agreed to make extracts from all these different plants and trees and stuff—from the leaves, from the bark, from the roots, from the pods, from this, that, and the other. And I hired a PhD who was actually doing some work for me, who was very good with her hands, very skilled. Her name was Kalpana. She was from India. Kalpana—K-A-L-P-A-N-A—Kalpana Mujoo—M-u-j-o-o. Her husband is a scientist here. They are both still here in the medical center. She was working for a colleague that collaborated with who was in my department—a pharmacologist—and I kind of took her over. She was working on some suppressor genes. I knew she was very skilled with her hands. She couldn’t write very well, unfortunately. You know, she has two languages—Hindi and English—but this is not uncommon. I mean, let’s go over there and try to write in Hindi or Chinese, you know? That’s not an uncommon problem around here. I feel like Joe Hoffmann—you know—every time I go there, he was like this coughing and sneezing and blah, blah, blah.

Tacey Ann Rosolowski, PhD:

Spring in Houston.

Jordan Gutterman, MD:

Yeah. So, we set up a little screen with an ovarian cancer align, and a few weeks later we began to get extracts. I didn’t know what they were. And we began to screen. Before killing—so it’s called—in retrospect—it’s called a phenotypic screen. Most drugs are not discovered this way anymore. Most drugs you find a target of interest, and then you screen millions of little compounds until you hit one. That is traditional. But the old way of doing it, what I call phenotypic screens—functional screens—you set up an assay. You want to see that it either blocks or enhances, that it would translate from the test tube situation, in vitro, to the in vivo. This is kind of the old-fashioned way of doing things. And this was definitely going out of favor. I didn’t know any—you know—this is a good example of not knowing a whole lot, and that’s good. Because I think if I had read too much or talked too much, people would have given me thousands of reasons never to do this. But I was going by gut and intuition and some of this other stuff. We went through many, many extracts. I thought we were just going to kill everything because of all these toxins. As it turned out—a little bit like the interferon story, where the impure stuff was just exactly like the pure stuff—these extracts from all these things didn’t do anything. And then one day, Kalpana comes into my office—same office where Mary had come to see me—and said, “Dr. Gutterman, it looks like we got a hit. There is this extract of this plant that killed some ovarian cancer cells.” I was only modestly excited. It was nothing like seeing a platelet count going up in hairy cell leukemia or a Philadelphia chromosome disappearing in a CML patient, but that’s because I’m a clinician, and I knew what that meant. I had no idea—and in fact, even if you knew what I was doing, I wouldn’t have been very excited. It didn’t mean much. But I called Joe up, and he said, “Well, let me try to purify that a little bit more.” I thought he would purify it a little bit more, and that would be it. And to our surprise, the killing was actually somewhat improved. It was still there. We took some normal cells, and it didn’t kill them. Now it began to get interesting. This was—and I remember flying out to Tuscan, by the way. As an aside, around this time, I decided to join the department that I’m still in, in 1996. It has gone through several iterations of names and so forth and grown from the department of a new guy who had just come from Canada around the time Mendelsohn came—unrelated—’96, ’97. It was called, I think, originally Molecular Therapeutics. Today it’s called the Department of Systems Biology. [Dr. Gordon] Mills is an MD/PhD, and he kind of left me alone. I mean, I’m a full professor, and I had Clayton funding to do this. And they gave me money for Dr. Mujoo and a couple of other—a tech and so forth. Not a lot of money, but they just said, “Do it.” As I said earlier, where else would you get this green—you know—blank check? Now, I wasn’t seeing patients. As a department chairman, I had kind of gradually stopped seeing—I would go down on rounds and hear about patients. We ran—during the really exciting days in the eighties and early-nineties at that department, we had conferences every day, where we went over patients, and it was very—it was actually quite exciting because we—well, obviously we had made the big breakthrough already in hairy cell leukemia and CML, but we were doing other things. And we also continued that work. But I, personally, had gradually stopped seeing patients. That was a choice. The choice wasn’t made overnight, but as I got more and more into the science, as I will tell the story, it became obvious to me that I—this was a conscious decision, that seeing patients—I couldn’t handle both. I wanted to read and read and learn and learn and learn. I said, “I think I’m going to be able to do more good for more people one day if I can really understand what I’m doing rather than seeing individual patients.” Other people make different choices. Do I miss it? Yes, I miss the human side. I still get calls on people, and I’m still involved. I still go to conferences. And I haven’t lost too much. You lose a little bit. I can’t remember the names of the new antibiotics, but the principles are the same. But that was a conscious decision. For someone listening or reading and so forth—you know—as a physician, it doesn’t mean that you absolutely—particularly now—physicians and many professions you get trained as whatever it is. Whether it’s a lawyer, an architect, a physicist, physician—you can do a lot of stuff. That’s the beauty of the world today. There’s so much information you can teach a lot, and you can go to people. So meanwhile, we got two or three or four other hits, but—you know—I could see that Hoffmann could only really concentrate on one or two things. So he began to concentrate on this particular one. I have no idea what the other ones are to this day. Then I went out there in the fall, I remember—October 1996—meeting with Arntzen and Mary. Now meanwhile, Mary relocated with a single child—she was a single mother—to set up this program in Arizona to collect all these tree and plant parts and coordinate—make sure Hoffmann was staying on track. He was a bit, to say the least, disorganized.

Tacey Ann Rosolowski, PhD:

What was the name of the program? Did it have a name?

Jordan Gutterman, MD:

Yeah. It’s called the Legume Project. I think these were mainly legumes—bean plants. I think that’s the name of it. That’s what Clayton called my program. Oh, by the way, I had to go back to Clayton and get money for him. They had to do an agreement with the University of Arizona. Meanwhile, Arntzen was up at Boyce Thompson—part of Cornell—again, and I got Clayton to put money into his lab. So now it was starting to expand. I forgot all this. Well, it was only after we got the hit. No, no, that’s not true. In ‘96, I had to go back to them. In ’95, they were supporting Mary and had a little money in Arntzen’s Houston lab and my lab. When Arntzen moved, they transferred that money up there. Mary stayed—came back physically over here. And he coordinated with Arntzen. And then in ’96, when we finally made that agreement with the University of Arizona and Hoffmann, she relocated to Tuscan because—

Tacey Ann Rosolowski, PhD:

What was the agreement you made with the University of Arizona?

Jordan Gutterman, MD:

Well—excuse me—the agreement was that they would only—that the Clayton Foundation would own all the intellectual property and they would give them money. I forget what the grant was to Hoffmann, but they gave him—I mean—they supported his whole program out there in an agreement, in exchange for the patent rights and so forth. And they still have some part of it, actually, today. Even eighteen years later they still have a potential role here. And so money was also being transferred—instead of A&M now, it went to—the agreement went to Boyce Thompson. And then we just continued this. I remember, by the time—by the way, around this time, ’96—during that year is when Mendelsohn came in. For the first year, he kept everything pretty much and then gradually made changes, and more and more specializations were going on. It was more economy. And he does a magnificent job in terms of growth. I mean, he was a magnificent fundraiser. He himself had some interesting issues with a drug, Erbitux—conflict of interest potentials. He made a lot of money, but he was one of the early ones in targeted therapy. He went through a difficult period because he was on the Enron board and then on the ImClone board. Enron, we know the story, and also because he was head of MD Anderson. By the way, LeMaistre was also on the Enron board. So those guys were in the— [The recorder is paused.] Tacey Ann Rosolowski Okay, we’re recording again.

Jordan Gutterman, MD:

But—you know—I was kind of doing my own thing. I mean, I was in Mills’s department. We were protected. We were considered to be a research department but had clinical privileges, and I was protected since I had my own money. I got more and more into the science, as I will talk about. The chemistry, the biology—I had to learn all this stuff. I mean, I had to learn about everything—plants. It was—it’s stated that it takes a minimum of ten years to master a topic. There’s probably more than one—there are many topics here. But it took me probably up until about 2006 that I felt even comfortable, and I still don’t feel that comfortable with most of it. But I know enough now to have directed this program. And then I reach out to the best. But back in ’96, ’97, ‘98, Hoffmann ran into a roadblock. He was getting sicker and sicker. He eventually passed away. He could not get pure compound. I had learned enough chemistry that we needed to get the structure of this stuff. So I was talking to a friend of mine that used to be at MD Anderson at Science Park, Tom Slaga, a PhD guy who is now in Denver. He said, “Why don’t you go to Hauser Chemical there in Boulder?” I don’t know anything about Hauser. It’s a natural product company, and they had made all the Taxol for the initial clinical trials, which eventually Bristol took over, but in the eighties and early nineties—and they were in Boulder. They were looking for business because natural products were kind of fading. And Slaga was interested in plants and nutrition. He was head of Science Park research. That’s out near Austin, in Bastrop, but now he lives in Denver. So I flew to Denver and drove with him up to Hauser, met two natural product chemists—a guy named Bailey and a guy named Sherlock and a guy named Jayatilake. I think it’s J-A-Y-A-T-I-L-A-K-E—Gamini—G-A-M-I-N-I. He and I began to work together a lot for several years. I still remember on September 1, 1998, the Clayton Foundation formed an agreement with Hauser to do this contract work to try to purify and get the contract. I had no idea. I thought it would take them—maybe because interferon took forever to clone and all that stuff. Now this is, again, the same excitement, because I had to learn about how you take crude stuff out of a plant. This was, by the way, coming from the seed pods, which is a renewable source. I obviously came to learn with the Taxol story that you can’t—don’t have to chop down trees. You get these pods every year when you renew—very exciting—lucky. October 15, 1998, my sixtieth birthday, I got a call from Gamini. We got pure stuff, and we got the structure, just like the interferon. We got the pure interferon, we got the structure, and we cloned it. I mean, this is really exciting stuff. So now I had to learn chemistry. I flew up eventually so see Arntzen, and he’s not a chemist, but he had a guy named Meinhart—German guy from Munich—Meinhart Zenk—Z-E-N-K—visiting. Zenk is a terpene chemist, and this was a terpene—a terpenoid. It had five rings and stuff. I didn’t know squat about what this was. I mean, I just knew that it was—a little bit about it. He looked at the structure now, and I see why he did it. There are three parts to the molecule—four parts, really. He pointed to three of the parts. He said that’s a delivery system, and the warhead—the business end is on the side chain over here. Well, he was right on. He got it. He had it exactly right on. But now I see, in retrospect, how he did it, because he’s an organic chemist. But still, it was very insightful. I didn’t know what he was talking about, but I said I’ll learn. And I’ve learned. So now we have to figure out what to do, and we didn’t have a lot of the stuff. We had to figure out what the mechanism of action—that’s the next—there are two things you want to do. You want to find out how it works and if possible find out what the so-called target is—what the molecular target is. Generally, a protein—it could be a nucleotide like RNA or maybe—or DNA for cancer. We were starting with a black box. We had no idea. We just knew it blocked the growth of cancer cells; it killed them. We didn’t even know how they killed. So that was my next phase now is to come back here and begin to figure out how this stuff works. Around this time I was very lucky. Another scientist, a young woman, who was working for another Indian scientist who I hired—she was working for him in a PhD—her name is Valsala Haridas. She still works with me. She’s my right hand and left hand and everything else—you know—scientifically, a marvelous human being. V—V as in Victor—A-L-S-A-L-A—Valsala Haridas—H-A-R-I-D-A-S. She was working for a guy named Aggarwal—Bharat Aggarwal—A-G-G-A-R-W-A-L. I first met him in Genentech, where he had purified something called TNF. And Dr. Aggarwal I hired her to work on cytokines, back when I become a department chairman. Only recently, like in January, he was accused of dressing up something like eighty manuscripts of reproducing the same data in different formats, and he’s in big trouble, I think, unfortunately. I like him. He ran a very strict lab. Dr. Haridas wanted to have a child with her husband who is a scientist and didn’t like the strictness of it. She asked for a job, and I liked her. That was one of the smartest things I’ve ever done—hiring her. So I sent her and Dr. Mujoo on the task of working on the mechanism of action. Dr. Mujoo, I might add, around 1980, moved on to another position because there were just reasons. It was just—she was very good at finding the original, and she made the original observation and discovery, and she was on the original patent. She’ll benefit if there is any financial reward and credit. She is a co-discoverer; there is no doubt about it. But she—I don’t know—rightfully or wrongfully, there were things happening in this department that just weren’t going to work out for her to stay. I’m not a control freak, but I had to have control of this program because it was so bizarre. In fact, the funny thing is today, finding drugs and working on drugs and academic centers now is becoming slightly fashionable. I was way out of place. And I can tell you, no one understood what we were doing or cared what we were doing or appreciated what we were doing. Again, a little bit like the interferon stuff, but I didn’t care I just—and I—

Tacey Ann Rosolowski, PhD:

Can I interrupt you just for a second?

Jordan Gutterman, MD:

Yeah, of course.

Tacey Ann Rosolowski, PhD:

I just wanted to ask, just for the record—

Jordan Gutterman, MD:

No, you know what? I don’t even give you a chance to even ask questions.

Tacey Ann Rosolowski, PhD:

No, no, no. You’re—because I don’t need to. You’re just covering all the bases. But this is just one little detail.

Jordan Gutterman, MD:

Yeah, of course.

Tacey Ann Rosolowski, PhD:

Out in Tucson, the program was called the Legume Project—Program.

Jordan Gutterman, MD:

I think so. I don’t know. We could check.

Tacey Ann Rosolowski, PhD:

Now, did you have a name for the chemical studies that were being done here to determine the mechanism of action? What was that called?

Jordan Gutterman, MD:

Well, okay. So I knew once we got the structure, I was now familiar enough—in fact, just today I was looking for the book that has a set of—I have everything in my books in storage, and I can’t find the book. There are a couple really wonderful books about the history of drugs. They’re just so exciting. Don’t forget, it was my father who said become a pharmacist. He lived next to that pharmacy. So mother and father are intertwined constantly. I’m not going to go back any more generations because I don’t know enough. But they’re always there—always, always, there. I looked up the history of how aspirin was named, and it was named after the plant—I forget exactly right now. I’m not—I’m starting to feel not very good here. I’m really winding down. But the name of the—they named it after the plant, and then it just—the structure of it ended in an I-N, so they came up with aspirin. I think the—it’s not aspergillus. That’s a fungus. But we can look up the name. So they named it after the plant and put an I-N at the end. So this comes from an Acacia victoria. I’m kind of an optimist, okay? And I’m really focused and determined. So I said, “Valsala, one day this is going to be important, so we got to get the name. It’s got to flow right.” And we were lucky. It comes from an Acacia—and I’m going to digress on that one in a minute and tell you kind of an extraordinary story about Acacias. But Acacia is A, and then comes—the victoria is the species. It was first discovered along the banks of the Victoria River, which is not, I think, in the state of Victoria, I’ve been told. I’m not sure where it is. It’s up near that area near Sydney, on the eastern—I guess that’s the eastern coast. So we named it A for Acacia and then V-I-C for Victoria. And the general structure of it—it’s got five rings and then two sugars in this side chain, which is really the action. But there is a generic name for these types of compounds that have rings—four rings or five rings—and sugars. They’re called saponins or saponins, which is a derivative of soap. Or soap is a derivative of saponin. If you shake them up they can form suds. And they don’t have a great track record. Digitalis is a saponin, by the way, so that was my great hope. The heart—the first heart drug from Dropsy back in ‘77—not ‘77—1777 or whatever it was. So that was a hope for me. But a lot of them are toxic. So I had my concerns whether this was going to do anything. So that’s how we named it—A for Acacia, V-I-C for Victoria, and then I-N for the last part of the—the general structure of the saponin, which is not the greatest name in the world because people don’t like them. Fortunately, this has activities different from saponins, but that’s I-N—and I-N is good because a lot of antibiotics have I-N at the end. They look like drugs. So the name—it’s an easy name. It’s a pleasant name. V is a very strong letter. A is—starting with a vowel, it’s got a nice ring to it. You know, that’s the name. So we called it the Avicin Project or the Legume. I think Clayton probably, still on the books, calls it the Legume Project. Now, meanwhile, Clayton is getting more and more excited. I took him out to Tucson. They had these trees growing. And these Acacia’s have thorns. That’s how they deter animals from eating them. The trustees came out on a hot, fall day—probably October I think—but it’s still 102 degrees out there. And we went out in the fields to see these. One of the trustees, Tom Brorby, who is now the chairman, was wearing—he told me just the other day. Just a week ago he told me this story that this was the first time he wore this suit—light wool Italian suit. He said the most money at the time that he had ever spent on a suit, tailor-made, blah, blah, blah, the whole nine yards. And he snagged it on a thorn out there. What in the hell is he doing with a suit? But he’s Clayton Foundation, and they’re very formal. I mean, I’ve never seen them without a necktie. So he snagged—he had to have to it. I’ve heard that story a thousand times. I still think he’s—he’s not mad at me, but he said, “Well, you better make some money out of this stuff for the foundation.” He had to get that reweaved. I just heard about this a week ago for the umpteenth time—how I took him out and didn’t warn him about the thorns in the field. It was hot. He was sweating in wool. It was just crazy. But they were excited—you know—and they were excited. So we put a patent application in on what’s called composition of matter. Again, I had to learn about patent law. Now, I had a great teacher. Charlie Arntzen probably could teach patent law. He just loves patents. And so Charlie was pretty involved in those early days. He didn’t stay involved because—you know—he was—Charlie was working on edible vaccines. And just to show the interesting people you meet when you start doing these things—you never know. Charlie was in—he loves to travel. He was in either Indonesia or Malaysia, and he saw a mother holding a child who was crying. And the mother just took a ripe banana and took a little—opened it up, and took a small little piece and put it on her finger, and then put it on the baby’s tongue, and the baby calmed down. And this—he got this idea. Why don’t we make vaccines and engineer them in plants? It’s cheaper, supposedly, than any other way of engineering vaccines. You put them in either potatoes or bananas. That’s what he was working on. I’m not sure where that field is now, but that was—but it was—more for third world stuff. So he had a hard time getting funding from—you know—from places I would go to. He would go to the WHO and so forth. He’s a very, very creative guy. I don’t talk to him much anymore. I haven’t really—he’s not been involved in this work for about the last decade. But he was key—key to the instrumental. Who would have known? He goes up to Cornell, and all these things start and weave, and this thing happens. So let’s see. This may be a good stopping point. I don’t know. Let me think about this a second. So we’re starting the work on mechanism—I’m starting to wind down, too, a little bit—we’ll talk about that. I think probably we start publishing—well, first we had to get the papers, and then we start publishing work and the chemistry. We applied for a patent, which, by the way, was awarded. It’s called composition of matter. That was, I think, awarded, I believe, in 2002. That’s the most important patent because the structure—you know—you can get around it. You can modify it, perhaps, and stuff, but a composition of matter is considered to be the most important patent you can get.

Tacey Ann Rosolowski, PhD:

Is that on here? Oh triterpene compositions?

Jordan Gutterman, MD:

Yes.

Tacey Ann Rosolowski, PhD:

Okay. It’s pending here.

Jordan Gutterman, MD:

Yeah, that’s way—it must be way out of date.

Tacey Ann Rosolowski, PhD:

It must be out of date. Okay. Oh, here’s one. Yeah. Right, triterpene compositions and methods for use thereof 2002—

Jordan Gutterman, MD:

Yeah. That’s it.

Tacey Ann Rosolowski, PhD:

Okay. Yeah.

Jordan Gutterman, MD:

Arntzen et al, because they go alphabetical.

Tacey Ann Rosolowski, PhD:

Yeah, Charles Arntzen, Mary Blake, Jordan Gutterman, Joseph Hoffmann, Gamini—

Jordan Gutterman, MD:

David Bailey.

Tacey Ann Rosolowski, PhD:

Yeah, David Bailey. I couldn’t—I’m stumbling over that woman’s name. But okay, great.

Jordan Gutterman, MD:

Kalpana Mujoo. The Hauser people waived—the contract was that they would waive their rights to the few patents. So they’re on the patent, but the patent is turned back over to Clayton. I think it’s a good stopping point.

Tacey Ann Rosolowski, PhD:

Okay. Let’s—why don’t we—? We’ll terminate for today.

Jordan Gutterman, MD:

I think we made a lot of headway. This is a whole story. It’s a whole new career. It’s a whole other story. Like I said, it’s Act Two.

Tacey Ann Rosolowski, PhD:

Yeah. Well, we’ll continue with Act Two next time.

Jordan Gutterman, MD:

It’s so exciting, though. You haven’t even heard the exciting stuff yet.

Tacey Ann Rosolowski, PhD:

Well—you know—you’ve been dangling this in front of me all this time, and I’m like, yeah. No, I’m glad to be in the story now. It’s really fabulous.

Jordan Gutterman, MD:

Oh it’s—yeah—you know—we started a company in Seattle, and we got to the point to the clinic, and then they gave the technology back. I’m starting a company with a brand new accelerator here with state money. We’re probably going to raise $16 million. We’re ready to go to patients. I mean, we’re ready.

Tacey Ann Rosolowski, PhD:

This is great. So to be continued.

Jordan Gutterman, MD:

Oh, for sure.

Tacey Ann Rosolowski, PhD:

To be continued.

Jordan Gutterman, MD:

Plus we have a whole decade now of stuff. I can condense that down, but how it affects metabolism, and—oh, it’s just—it just fits right in with the new—all this new work coming out with obesity and metabolism. It’s just—I mean—we’re just starting.

Tacey Ann Rosolowski, PhD:

Well, it’s 4:45, and we’re closing off the interview for today.

Jordan Gutterman, MD:

Oh, okay. Sorry.

Tacey Ann Rosolowski, PhD:

That’s all right. (End of Audio Session 3)

Chapter 14: Establishing a New Research Focus: Experiments, Money, Organization

Share

COinS