There's a growing need for physician-scientists who can see from both sides of the table. Miguel Tovar/University of Houston

Physician-scientists are a group of specialized researchers at the intersection of medicine and technology. Earning both medical degrees and Ph.D.s, they offer a perspective beyond the scope of clinical practice.

Three such researchers discussed how they make the connections between discovery and patient care.

Why a dual education matters

Shaun Xiaoliu Zhang, director of the Center for Nuclear Receptors and Cell Signaling at the University of Houston and M.D. Anderson professor of biology and biochemistry, knows exactly what the clinical demands are.

"I can see from the M.D. perspective, but at the same time I have a Ph.D. — I know how to design research properly," he says. "In the clinic, you're faced with reality that a patient is struggling but you don't have the tools to treat those patients. If you engage in research you can create a tool."

Zhang says clinicians know the need but may struggle to design a solution. A Ph.D., on the other hand, may only know basic research.

Renowned hormone researcher Jan-Åke Gustafsson, Robert A. Welch professor of biology and biochemistry and founding director of the Center for Nuclear Receptors and Cell Signaling, agrees.

"The dual education makes it possible for you to see which diseases are in need of more research, drugs and so on," he says.

Physician-scientists are the driving force behind many advances of modern medicine.

"The way I look at it is, practicing medicine is relatively easy but coming up with the next diagnostic device or the next treatment for a disease is way more difficult, way more challenging," says Chandra Mohan, Hugh Roy and Lillie Cranz Cullen Endowed professor of biomedical engineering at UH.

"You see patients with certain diseases, and you know there's a dire need for better diagnostics, earlier treatment, earlier diagnosis with fewer side effects," he says.

While researchers spend time primarily in the laboratory and clinical practitioners interact with patients, they both want to make an impact.

"We have made some discoveries which have led to the development of new drugs and better understanding of certain diseases," says Gustafsson. "There's a great satisfaction that it may help people to get healthy."

Traditional research brings value to a university

The synergy of this dual education makes these investigators valuable not only to academia, but also to medical science.

"I can't imagine doing translational research without medical training," Zhang says. "If you have this part without the other, you don't know where to go. With medical training, you know exactly which direction to go."

Mohan echos that assessment.

"When you start doing research there are so many questions you can answer," he says. "Sometimes there are questions which are just too basic. They're too far removed from how it will impact a patient's life. So what are the most important questions? I think questions that really make a difference in the patient's life are the most important."

Zhang notes that the National Institutes of Health has switched its funding philosophy — once focused on basic science, it now is more interested in translational research, with a direct relationship to patient health.

As physician-scientists, these "translators" of medical research are able to bridge the chasm.

Amr Elnashai, vice president/vice chancellor of research and technology transfer at UH, says physician-scientists play an important role.

"The increasing importance of deploying technology in medicine renders it essential for a progressive research university to hire medical Ph.D. holders who are in an ideal position to bridge the gap between engineering and science on the one hand, and the broad field of medicine on the other," he says.

Research groups that bring both fields together not only have a much higher probability of impacting lives by adopting the latest technology in medical applications, he adds, but they also give interdisciplinary teams greater access to specific funding pursue such solutions.

In that sense, says Elnashai, medical Ph.D. researchers play an important part of the future research university.

------

This article originally appeared on the University of Houston's The Big Idea.

Nitiya Spearman is the internal communications coordinator for the UH Division of Research.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Houston startup taps strategic partner to produce novel 'biobased leather'

cleaner products

A Houston-based next-gen material startup has revealed a new strategic partnership.

Rheom Materials, formerly known as Bucha Bio, has announced a strategic partnership with thermoplastic extrusion and lamination company Bixby International, which is part of Rheom Material’s goal for commercial-scale production of its novel biobased material, Shorai.

Shorai is a biobased leather alternative that meets criteria for many companies wanting to incorporate sustainable materials. Shorai performs like traditional leather, but offers scalable production at a competitive price point. Extruded as a continuous sheet and having more than 92 percent biobased content, Shorai achieves an 80 percent reduction in carbon footprint compared to synthetic leather, according to Rheom.

Rheom, which is backed by Houston-based New Climate Ventures, will be allowing Bixby International to take a minority ownership stake in Rheom Materials as part of the deal.

“Partnering with Bixby International enables us to harness their extensive expertise in the extrusion industry and its entire supply chain, facilitating the successful scale-up of Shorai production,” Carolina Amin Ferril, CTO at Rheom Materials, says in a news release. “Their highly competitive and adaptable capabilities will allow us to offer more solutions and exceed our customers’ expectations.”

In late 2024, Rheom Materials started its first pilot-scale trial at the Bixby International facilities with the goal of producing Shorai for prototype samples.

"The scope of what we were doing — both on what raw materials we were using and what we were creating just kept expanding and growing," founder Zimri Hinshaw previously told InnovationMap.

Listen to Hinshaw on the Houston Innovators Podcast episode recorded in October.

Justice Department sues to block Houston-based HPE's $14B buyout of Juniper

M&A News

The Justice Department sued to block Hewlett Packard Enterprise's $14 billion acquisition of rival Juniper Networks on Thursday, the first attempt to stop a merger by a new Trump administration that is expected to take a softer approach to mergers.

The Justice complaint alleges that Hewlett Packer Enterprise, under increased competitive pressure from the fast-rising Juniper, was forced to discount products and services and invest more in its own innovation, eventually leading the company to simply buy its rival.

The lawsuit said that the combination of businesses would eliminate competition, raise prices and reduce innovation.

HPE and Juniper issued a joint statement Thursday, saying the companies strongly oppose the DOJ's decision.

“We will vigorously defend against the Department of Justice’s overreaching interpretation of antitrust laws and will demonstrate how this transaction will provide customers with greater innovation and choice, positively change the dynamics in the networking market,” the companies said.

The combined company would create more competition, not less, the companies said.

The Justice Department's intervention — the first of the new administration and just 10 days after Donald Trump's inauguration — comes as somewhat of a surprise. Most predicted a second Trump administration to ease up on antitrust enforcement and be more receptive to mergers and deal-making after years of hypervigilance under former President Joe Biden’s watch.

Hewlett Packard Enterprise announced one year ago that it was buying Juniper Networks for $40 a share in a deal expected to double HPE’s networking business.

In its complaint, the government painted a picture of Hewlett Packard Enterprise as a company desperate to keep up with a smaller rival that was taking its business.

HPE salespeople were concerned about the “Juniper threat,” the complaint said, also alleging that one former executive told his team that “there are no rules in a street fight,” encouraging them to “kill” Juniper when competing for sales opportunities.

The Justice Department said that Hewlett Packard Enterprise and Juniper are the U.S.'s second- and third-largest providers of wireless local area network (WLAN) products and services for businesses.

“The proposed transaction between HPE and Juniper, if allowed to proceed, would further consolidate an already highly concentrated market — and leave U.S. enterprises facing two companies commanding over 70% of the market,” the complaint said, adding that Cisco Systems was the industry leader.

Many businesses and investors accused Biden regulatory agencies of antitrust overreach and were looking forward to a friendlier Trump administration.

Under Biden, the Federal Trade Commission sued to block a $24.6 billion merger between Kroger and Albertsons that would have been the largest grocery store merger in U.S. history. Two judges agreed with the FTC’s case, blocking the proposed deal in December.

In 2023, the Department of Justice, through the courts, forced American and JetBlue airlines to abandon their partnership in the northeast U.S., saying it would reduce competition and eventually cost consumers hundreds of millions of dollars a year. That partnership had the blessing of the Trump administration when it took effect in early 2021.

U.S. regulators also proposed last year to break up Google for maintaining an “abusive monopoly” through its market-dominate search engine, Chrome. Court hearings on Google’s punishment are scheduled to begin in April, with the judge aiming to issue a final decision before Labor Day. It’s unclear where the Trump administration stands on the case.

One merger that both Trump and Biden agreed shouldn’t go through is Nippon Steel’s proposed acquisition of U.S. Steel. Biden blocked the nearly $15 billion acquisition just before his term ended. The companies challenged that decision in a federal lawsuit early this year.

Trump has consistently voiced opposition to the deal, questioning why U.S. Steel would sell itself to a foreign company given the regime of new tariffs he has vowed.