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 brain health co. secures $6.5M for rare disease study

neuro funding

Houston-based Goldenrod Therapeutics, part of Fannin Partners' portfolio, has announced the initial close of a $6.5 million series seed preferred stock round.

The round was led by Ataxia Ventures and an affiliate of Fannin, according to a news release.

Goldenrod Therapeutics plans to use the funding to support manufacturing, formulation optimization, IND-enabling studies and a Phase I study of its drug to treat brain inflammation, known as 11h.

The study will consider how 11h, which blocks the enzyme PDE4, could treat Friedreich’s ataxia (FA), a rare genetic disease that affects movement, speech and balance. To date, other PDE4 inhibitors have proven to regulate neuroinflammation and neuronal signaling, but have had adverse gastrointestinal side effects or have not reached enough of the central nervous system, according to Goldenrod.

The company says its 11h is expected to have "broad applicability" with limited emetric side effects.

“Our 11h program is a next-generation, orally bioavailable, brain-penetrant PDE4 inhibitor, where researchers overcame longstanding limitations associated with earlier PDE4 inhibitors," Dr. Dev Chatterjee, CEO of Goldenrod, said in the news release. "We believe this creates the potential for a best-in-class therapy for Friedreich’s Ataxia and a potential foundation for development across multiple neurodegenerative and neuroinflammatory disorders.”

11h was first developed at the University of Nebraska Medical Center (UNeMed). Houston-based Fannin Partners in-licensed the product 2020 and landed SBIR Phase I funding to support its initial development for opioid use disorder soon after.

Goldenrod has also received funding to study 11h's effectiveness for multiple sclerosis, methamphetamine addiction and cocaine addiction.

Goldenrod says it is developing 11h to target a variety of neurological and inflammatory conditions, including Alzheimer's disease, multiple sclerosis, ALS, substance use disorders, Batten disease, pain and traumatic brain injury.

27 Houston companies make Fortune 500 for 2026, led by energy giants

Houston HQs

Editor's note: This article has been updated to correct the number of companies based in the Dallas-Fort Worth area.

Houston is a giant among U.S. hubs for corporate headquarters.

The 2026 Fortune 500 lists 27 companies based in the Houston area, with many energy companies claiming top spots. Houston ties with Chicago for the second-most Fortune 500 headquarters, preceded only by New York City (53). Dallas-Fort Worth is home to 24 Fortune 500 headquarters.

Texas leads the nation for Fortune 500 headquarters (57), with California in the No. 2 spot and New York at No. 3.

“Texas is the undisputed headquarters of headquarters,” Gov. Greg Abbott said in a news release. “The world’s leading businesses invest with confidence in Texas because of our welcoming business climate, predictable regulatory environment, and skilled and growing workforce. People and businesses are choosing Texas because Texas works.”

The 2026 Fortune 500 ranks the largest U.S. corporations based on revenue in fiscal year 2025.

Here’s a rundown of the 27 Fortune 500 companies based in the Houston area.

  • No. 9 ExxonMobil
  • No. 21 Chevron
  • No. 29 Phillips 66
  • No.55 Sysco
  • No. 75 ConocoPhillips
  • No. 89 Enterprise Products Partners
  • No. 103 Plains GP Holdings
  • No. 133 Hewlett Packard Enterprise
  • No. 149 NRG Energy
  • No. 157 Quanta Services
  • No. 164 Baker Hughes
  • No. 173 Occidental Petroleum
  • No. 179 Waste Management
  • No. 201 EOG Resources
  • No. 204 Group 1 Automotive
  • No. 207 Halliburton
  • No. 223 Cheniere Energy
  • No. 236 Corebridge Financial
  • No. 262 Targa Resources
  • No. 266 Kinder Morgan
  • No. 388 Westlake
  • No. 435 CenterPoint Energy
  • No. 438 APA
  • No. 440 Comfort Systems USA
  • No. 455 NOV
  • No. 488 KBR
  • No. 496 Coterra Energy. Oklahoma City, Oklahoma-based Devon Energy and Houston-based Coterra Energy merged in early May, with the combined company retaining the Devon Energy name and the Houston headquarters.

The Greater Houston Partnership notes the Houston area soon will welcome its 28th Fortune 500 company. Expand Energy (formerly Chesapeake Energy), appearing at No. 362 on the 2026 list, says it’s moving its headquarters from Oklahoma City to Spring this year.

As the natural gas producer prepares to relocate to Texas, it’s hunting for a new leader. Nick Dell’Osso stepped down as president and CEO earlier this year. Board Chairman Michael Wichterich is interim president and CEO.

Dell’Osso became president and CEO of Oklahoma City-based Gulfport Energy effective May 28.

---

This article first appeared on EnergyCapitalHTX.com.

Elon Musk's SpaceX is about to make its debut on Wall Street

Money Moves

Elon Musk's rocket company SpaceX will make its debut on Wall Street Friday, June 12, and both institutional and retail investors are expected to gobble up the 555.6 million shares going up for sale at $135 apiece. Musk, already the world's richest man, could become its first trillionaire.

SpaceX is likely to become the biggest IPO ever, with proceeds of around $75 billion. SpaceX hopes to become the first company to send people to Mars. In fact, part of Musk’s future compensation depends on SpaceX eventually establishing a colony of at least 1 million people on the red planet.

Why SpaceX is going public now

In a video conference on Musk's social media platform X, he told JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon that people have suggested for the last 10 years that he take SpaceX public. He's doing it now because the company plans to put 100,000 next-generation Starlink satellites into orbit. Deploying AI data centers in space is a “massive new growth base and you need capital for that,” he said.

Going public provides access to the capital that SpaceX needs. But it also exposes it to more scrutiny from shareholders and more regulatory oversight. That includes filing quarterly financial reports, which critics say incentivizes short-term thinking over longer-term planning and creates unnecessary costs for a company. Securities regulators are currently soliciting public comment on a proposal to require public companies to file the financial reports only twice every year.

How the IPO impacts the company

Musk will hold the majority of a special class of shares, giving him control over decisions related to company strategy, finances and personnel. On the latter, because of his ownership of most of these Class B shares, the only person who can fire Musk as CEO is Musk.

The company credits Musk with being the “driving force” behind its growth, innovation and success. But what happens if Musk is no longer in the picture? SpaceX warns that the loss of Musk could disrupt its ability to execute its strategy as well as hurt its “reputation and relationships with customers, partners and other stakeholders.”

The company also warns that finding a replacement with the same skills and experience as Musk would be time-consuming, if not nearly impossible. As Wedbush Securities analyst Dan Ives wrote Wednesday, “At the end of the day Musk is SpaceX and SpaceX is Musk.”

What could make or break SpaceX

Currently in the test phase, the gigantic reusable Starship rocket is key to SpaceX realizing Musk's ambitions. Much of the commercial space business hinges on SpaceX developing Starship’s capability to be fully reusable and hearty enough for a quick turnaround between flights. If that doesn't happen, SpaceX warns that putting data centers and satellites in space will take longer and cost more money, meaning it risks customers bailing on the company.

Analysts say that by pioneering reusable rockets, SpaceX has established a clear lead on competitors such as Blue Origin, led by Amazon founder Jeff Bezos. The Starlink satellite business competes with, among others, AST SpaceMobile – which is relying on a SpaceX rocket to send its latest generation of satellites into orbit next week.

The prospectus filed last week says SpaceX’s biggest potential market is the sale of business-oriented artificial intelligence products designed to transform how people get work done. It’s an opportunity SpaceX predicts would be worth $22.7 trillion if it could somehow dominate rivals like Anthropic, OpenAI and Microsoft in a highly competitive industry. But the prospectus shows no clear path to profitability for the xAI business, which merged with SpaceX earlier this year.

Why Wall Street is paying attention

If the SpaceX IPO is as successful, the stock could quickly join the Nasdaq 100, a widely followed index that tracks the 100 largest non-financial companies in the composite. That's important because some popular funds, such as the $460 billion QQQ exchange-traded fund, mimic the index and will automatically buy whatever is listed in the index.

Nasdaq recently changed its rules to allow select companies to enter the Nasdaq 100 after just 15 trading days.

S&P Dow Jones Indices, on the other hand, is sticking to established and more traditional thresholds that will not allow SpaceX or other companies with gargantuan IPOs faster entry into its S&P 500 index. That means even high-profile companies will still need to wait for their stocks to trade a full 12 months before they can enter the index.

Companies want to be in the S&P 500 in particular because it's arguably the most important index on Wall Street, with trillions of dollars either mimicking it exactly or benchmarked against it. Vanguard's VOO fund that tracks the S&P 500 has roughly $950 billion invested in it, for example.