UTMB CTSA recompetition strategies No FOA-what we

UTMB CTSA recompetition strategies

No FOA-what we know… IOM report stresses… • Build on unique strengths • Innovate and evaluate what we do • Education of a broadworkforce will continue to be a focus • We must show participation and value to the national consortium NCATS Directorship says… • TR is a team activity • Partner/leverage • Show value to communities, stakeholders, NIH ICs

Strategies • UTMB-centric • Build on Translational Teams to leverage our unique institutional strengths and innovation in clinical research • Grow clinical trials • Strengthen PCOR • TRCC-centric • Disseminate CI&EP throughout the TRCC • TRCC KL 2 Network • Responsible Conduct for Research? • Community engagement • Clinical trial network • National consortium-centric • SGC 3 Team Science Initiative • National Mentoring Research Network

Innovation in educational activities What we have implemented: Clinical science Ph. D in medical bioinformatics. Human Pathophysiology and Translational Medicine Certificate Programs • Entrepreneurship, bioventure- (now being launched at the TMC) • Systems biology • PCOR Modules in translational team management Collaborative Innovation and Entrepreneurship Program (CI&EP)

Alignment of Training and Education Activities with MTTs Mentoring Clinical Science Program Translational Assistant Professors Research Scholars Team Workshops Collaborating Investigators Established Investigator Research specialties Project Manager Team Leadership Council Principal Investigator MTT roles Research specialties Human Subjects Graduate Human Students Pathophysiology And Translational Strategic core Translational Medicine Research Track Health Care Trainees (MD, PT, RN) Courses Tools and Techniques BT Ameredes, in preparation

The Texas Regional CTSA (TRCC) Collaborative Innovation and Entrepreneurial Program (CI&EP) Year 1: Implementation Findings and Recommendations Christina M. Cestone, Ph. D The broad aim of the CI&EP initiative is to accelerate the translation of innovative technologies and processes into successful commercial ventures. The initiative seeks to spur innovation through educational training partnerships with UT Austin -Mc. Combs School of Business (UT), NASA Johnson Space Center (NASA JSC), and University of Houston, Clear Lake (UHCL).

CI&EP Implementation Schedule (20122013) *Maximum enrollment 25. Christina M. Cestone, Ph. D

Course Enrollment Metrics UTMB Managing Technology Leading Technology Corporate Venturing Business Innovation Collaborative Innovation Other UT Total Completed System Enrolle Requiremen d ts 7 4 11 6 3 3 6 18 2 20 In Progress 6 45 5 50 25 Christina M. Cestone, Ph. D

Participants N=33 (~30% of enrolled) 71% held terminal degrees, • 41% Ph. Ds (Research Scientists, Postdocs) • 17. 6% MDs (Faculty and Research) • 11. 8% MD/Ph. Ds • Remaining trainees pursuing advanced degrees or staff. • 65% between 25 and 35 Y/O Christina M. Cestone, Ph. D

Key Findings 1. Participants reported the Management of Technology course influenced, to a large or very large extent, their perceived ability to commercialize scientific discoveries. 2. Participants reported learning the business terminology necessary to lead cross-disciplinary scientific collaborations. 3. Participants reported immediate utility of Business Innovation course concepts. Christina M. Cestone, Ph. D

Leveraging the TRCC This meeting’s outcomes in clinical research networks- Conduct multisite clinical trial throughout the TRCC- would be extremely powerful. Several trials under development: • N. Abate CER on NASH associated with type 2 DM in hispanics • D. Herndon, DOD-funded multi-site trial in burns treatment Infrastructure provided by CTSA • Harmonization of processes (Master Trial Agreements, etc. ) • Data management/Data coordinating center(s) • Inventory of clinical trialists • Link Cores- MOU-

Leveraging the TRCC Education • Disseminate CI&EP throughout the TRCC- bioventures now hosted at the TMC • TRCC KL 2 Network • Responsible Conduct for Research? Mentoring- mentoring network throughout the TRCC- perhaps contribute to CTSA-National Research Mentoring Network (NRMN, PIs-C. Bylington, Univ. Utah, K. Freund, Tufts Univ. ) We need a mechanism for keeping track of working groups. Executive committee?

National Agenda- SGC 3 Team Science affinity network. Goals are: 1. To produce an integrated development/education/evaluation group; 2. Share and disseminate evidence-based practices; 3. Conduct and evaluate evidence-based research interventions across CTSA sites. For example: a) b) c) d) collaboration readiness/needs assessment, collaboration skills training, meeting management training evaluation

MTTs to promote translational research How CTSAs can support teams: • Calhoun, WJ, Wooten, K, Bhavnani, S, Anderson, KE, Freeman, J, and Brasier, AR. The CTSA as an Exemplar Framework for Developing Multidisciplinary Translational Teams. Clin Transl Sci. 6(1): 60 -71, 2013. Interventions to improve team leadership and functions • Bhavnani, S. K. , Farroni, J. S. , Crowder, J. , Mc. Kinney, B. , Pillai, R. , Calhoun W. J. , Rose, R. M. Carter, M. A. The Role of Method Intuition in Translational Ethics. Proceedings of AMIA Summit on Translational Bioinformatics (2012). We’ve refined our MTT review process for assessing collaboration readiness, supported 16 teams with CTSA-ascribable grant outcomes and publications We’ve demonstrated the transformative impact of the CTSA on culture • Kotarba, J, Symbolic Interaction and Applied Social Research: A Focus on Translational Science Research, Symbolic Interaction , Volume 37, Number 2 (2014)

Evaluating outcomes of MTTs Mixed methods assessment of team project outcomes and longitudinal assessment of development • Wooten, KC, Rose, RM, Ostir, GV, Calhoun, WJ, Ameredes, B. T. and Brasier, AR. Assessing and Evaluating Multidisciplinary Translational Teams: A Case Illustration of a Mixed Methods Approach and an Integrative Model. Evaluation in the Health Sciences, 2014.

Current status Assembled and met with steering committee (H. Falk-Krzesinski, Elsevier; K. Hall, NCI; B. Spring, NWU; D Ilgen, Univ. MI; E. Salas, U. of Fla: B. Trochim, Columbia; M. Bennett, NIH; J. Keyton, NCU; D. Rubio, UPitt). The committee endorsed our research-oriented plan and will work with us to coordinate with ongoing IOM/NSF initiatives. 2 organizational teleconferences in July and August and one organizational meeting Currently, 27 participants from 12 distinct CTSA sites: • 12 in education • 16 in team development • 12 in evaluation Immediate goals: • Develop uniform ontologies • Identify major needs in team science in participating CTSA sites • Prioritize, deploy and evaluate team science educational activities 16

CTSA National Research Mentoring Network Goal is to increase diversity of the biomedical workforce (URM, LES). One network will be funded in 2014 through the NIH common fund. It is expected that the network will be closely integrated with the CTSA, CC-CHOC, ACTS, and BUILD networks and others. This summer, P 20 planning grants were awarded to 6 sites, one (Blyington and Freud) supported by 41 CTSA PIs. A planning meeting was held in Philadelphia last week. Although the FOA not released, the goal is to develop, disseminate and evaluate evidence-based strategies for promoting URM involvement in the biomedical workforce. The TRCC could be a meaningful contributor to the NRMN 17