this translational research

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals

Translational research articles from across Nature Portfolio

Translational research involves the application of knowledge gained through basic research to studies that could support the development of new products. For example, translational research in the field of medicine may involve using knowledge of the biology of a disease to identify and evaluate chemical compounds in disease models, with a view to selecting potential candidate drugs to advance into clinical trials.

Functional precision medicine for pediatric cancers

A small, prospective clinical study shows that ex vivo drug screening of pediatric cancer samples can identify effective therapeutic options. If validated, these findings could herald a new approach to precision medicine in this setting.

• M. Emmy M. Dolman
• Paul G. Ekert

Latest Research and Reviews

Study on genotype and phenotype of novel CYP2D6 variants using pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic models with metoprolol as a substrate drug

• Jianchang Qian
• Jianping Cai

Antiviral cellular therapy for enhancing T-cell reconstitution before or after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (ACES): a two-arm, open label phase II interventional trial of pediatric patients with risk factor assessment

Viral infection is a common risk for immune-compromised individuals, particularly pediatric patients receiving hematopoietic stem cell transplants. Here the authors report a phase II trial testing adoptive transfer of third party, virus-specific T cells on the feasibility, safety, clinical responses, as well as homeostasis of antiviral immunity in the recipients.

• Michael D. Keller
• Patrick J. Hanley
• Michael A. Pulsipher

Ambulatory electrocardiographic longitudinal monitoring in a canine model for Duchenne muscular dystrophy identifies decreased very low frequency power as a hallmark of impaired heart rate variability

• Inès Barthélémy
• Stéphane Blot

Anti-inflammatory effect of thalidomide in an experimental lung donor model of brain death

• Vanessa Sana Vilela
• Karina Andrighetti de Oliveira Braga
• Paulo Manuel Pêgo-Fernandes

Understanding the relationship between surfing performance and fin design

• James R. Forsyth
• Grant Barnsley
• Marc in het Panhuis

Sirolimus-coated Eustachian tube balloon dilatation for treating Eustachian tube dysfunction in a rat model

• Jeon Min Kang
• Song Hee Kim
• Jung-Hoon Park

News and Comment

CD56 expression predicts response to Daratumumab-based regimens

• Allen J. Robinette
• Laila Huric
• Francesca Cottini

A phase 1 dose-escalation study of low-dose lenalidomide maintenance post-allogeneic stem cell transplantation for high-risk acute myeloid leukaemia or myelodysplastic syndrome

• Ray Mun Koo
• David S. Ritchie

Robots learning to imitate surgeons — challenges and possibilities

Autonomous surgical robots have the potential to transform surgery and increase access to quality health care. Advances in artificial intelligence have produced robots mimicking human demonstrations. This application might be feasible for surgical robots but is associated with obstacles in creating robots that emulate surgeon demonstrations.

• Samuel Schmidgall
• Ji Woong Kim
• Axel Krieger

Large differencies in age-specific survival in multiple myeloma in the nordic countries

• Kari Hemminki
• Frantisek Zitricky
• Markus Hansson

Developing a conceptual framework for the early adoption of healthcare technologies in hospitals

• Sheena Visram
• Yvonne Rogers
• Neil J. Sebire

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

• Your Stories

Evidence Based Living

Bridging the gap between research and real life

• In The Media
• The Learning Center
• Cornell Cooperative Extension
• Youth Development
• Health and Wellness

What is translational research?

Cornell’s College of Human Ecology is pursuing a translational research model to better link social and behavioral science research to extension and outreach, creating a more seamless link between science and service. But the question arises: What is “translational research?”

Evidence-Based Living sat down with Wethington to talk about the growing field of translational research.

To start off, what exactly is translational research?

Many definitions have been given for translational research, but the definition I like best is that it is a systematic effort to convert basic research knowledge into practical applications to enhance human health and well being. 

Translational research was designed for the medical world.  It emerged in response to concern over the long time lag between scientific discoveries and changes in treatments, practices, and health policies that incorporate the new discoveries.

What is applied research, and how does it differ?

Translational research is broader than the traditional term “applied research.”  Applied research is any research that may possibly be useful for enhancing health or well-being. It does not necessarily have to have any effort connected with it to take the research to a practical level. 

For example, an applied research study might analyze longitudinal data that tracks participants’ health and social relationships.  The researchers would report their findings in an academic journal.

But in translational research, the same study would include some “action steps.”  The researchers would partner with a community and ask for ideas about how their findings might apply there.  Together, they would come up with an intervention plan that would also include scientific evaluation of its effectiveness. 

Why are social science researchers slower to adopt these models compared to the medical community?

I think the answer to this question is that researchers have followed where the money has been allocated. The opportunities for social and behavioral scientists have not been established as rapidly.

More recently, three major government institutions have been funding projects that emphasize public health outreach using translational research – the Centers for Disease Control, the National Institutes of Health and the National Institute on Aging.  All three have been establishing translational research centers across the country, primarily focused on underserved communities and health disparities.

Thus, social scientists are only now being encouraged to take part.  More recently economic stimulus funds dispersed the National Institute of Health funded a number of translational research projects headed by social scientists, including three funded at Cornell.  I predict that soon there will be social scientists engaged in translational research across the country, not just at funded centers.

What are the benefits of moving toward translational research?

For researchers, there is benefit to being affiliated with a center that provides seed funding for projects, methodological assistance, advice on developing proposals and experience in getting community input into research projects.

For universities, translational research centers provide a tactical advantage for attracting more funding.  Translational research centers also provide a way for universities to meet public service goals in their strategic plans.

For communities, translational research provides opportunities to make a difference in their own communities.  As part of one of the Cornell centers, we engaged public service agency directors in events where they could contribute to our research agenda.  With a stake in the research, communities feel that they are making a valued and important contribution.  We heard over and over from the community members that this was a real source of pride and accomplishment for them.

How can extension programs participate?

One way local extension programs can participate in translational research is to take part in community stakeholder groups that meet with researchers who are designing intervention and prevention research programs.  Typically, a wide variety of stakeholders need to be engaged.  County Cooperative Extension offices have many collaborative relationships in their counties and can work with researchers to make contacts.

Typically, local extension professionals do not have time to engage in research themselves.  Yet they have valuable experience that can be shared.  This makes Cooperative Extension an ideal contributor for implementing programs.

Nice reading! Thank you

A remarkable extraordinary read, ideally other huge schools can take an interest in something like this.

Quite the great read, hopefully other large schools are able to participate in something like this.

Speak Your Mind Cancel reply

A project at…, evidence-based blogs.

• Bandolier Evidence-Based Health Care
• British Psychological Society Research Digest
• Economics in Cooperative Extension
• EPB Exchange
• New Voices for Research
• Research Blogging
• Trust the Evidence

Subscribe by e-mail

Please, insert a valid email.

Thank you, your email will be added to the mailing list once you click on the link in the confirmation email.

Spam protection has stopped this request. Please contact site owner for help.

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Return to top of page

Copyright © 2024 · Magazine Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

• Open access
• Published: 18 September 2023

Translational research and key aspects to make it successful

• Animesh Acharjee   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2735-7010 1 , 2 , 3 , 4  

Translational Medicine Communications volume  8 , Article number:  19 ( 2023 ) Cite this article

1219 Accesses

2 Altmetric

Metrics details

Translational research [ 1 ] refers to the translation of scientific discoveries into practical applications that can benefit patients and the wider society. In translational research, basic scientists and clinicians collaborate to develop research questions and plan for testing, implementing new interventions for the bed applications. So, in a way translational research [ 1 ] aims to improve human health through the integration of basic science and clinical practice. However, it requires special skillsets that are less pronounce in traditional clinical or basic research.

This letter aims to identify the key soft skills parameters that are essential for successful translational projects.

Academic leadership vs. transformative leadership

Leadership can be defined as the ability to motivate, inspire, and direct people or groups towards a common goal. In translational research, leadership can include overseeing a team consisting of healthcare professionals. It also involves setting priorities and objectives for the organisation [ 2 ]. It is vital to implement policies and strategies that improve education quality, support faculty, staff, and uphold institution's mission and objectives. In several ways, translational leadership is different from academic leadership: Translational research leadership must be more patient-centric and people-cantered. It should also focus on the integration of individual expertise into a larger framework. Facilitate interactions between clinically motivated issues and non-clinical elements such as statistical or mathematical considerations. These skills can be developed while maintaining cultural humility. This will result in stronger translational research teams and increased satisfaction at the locations where they are applied.

Management of the translational projects

Project management is a method of ensuring that complex tasks are completed on time and in a systematic manner. This involves applying relevant data, tools, and skills in a logical, structured, and efficient way. Project management is essential for translational research and it requires collaboration and mainly coordination between many departments. It can be very beneficial when specialists with different skills or professions collaborate on specific tasks. Although project management is well-established in many other industries, it has been less popular in academic science and clinical research. In the past two decades, there has been a rise in funding for collaborative research projects that bring together subject matter experts from different fields to solve scientific problems. The federal Programme Management Improvement and Accountability Act (Federal Programme Management Improvement and Accountability Act) further demonstrated this trend in this domain.

• Communication

Communication is the key in the translational research as it improves everyone's awareness and keeps them informed about the situation’s arounds the projects. One of the examples would be in the area of the translational diagnostics research where discovery is made by computational or quantitative group and trial performed by another group. Those groups need to be constant communication on the updates and follow ups needed accordingly. One of the best ways to communicate and getting periodic update using an organised meeting with an agenda. Such meetings helps to keep everything in order and ensures that all topics are covered. In addition to this, brief report or minutes document helps to make decisions and prioritize actions and hold participants accountable for their responsibilities. Thus, it provides an unique opportunity to bridge the gap in translational medicine [ 3 ].

Team composition and dynamics

For teams to achieve their translational driven goals, team dynamics [ 4 ] is essential. It creates an environment that encourages, produces work, and helps its members grow professionally. The interactions, relationships, communication patterns, and performance of team members can have an impact on their overall effectiveness and performance. Team dynamics that work well emphasize cooperation, mutual respect and open communication. They also encourage inclusion with people who are supportive. Different perspectives, backgrounds and experiences can benefit teams for example: inclusion of the machine learning and clinical expert in the same team. However, it can also lead to conflicts which must be managed well using soft skills like conflict or stress management. Team members need to have faith in each other's abilities, intentions, as well as their dedication. Team success is dependent on the ability to resolve conflicts and hence it is important to take timely steps, understand each other's perspective, and find mutually beneficial solutions.

Collaboration and network

Collaboration is the key in this domain. Researchers in the lab-based projects or clinic are expected to combine the expertise and work in a collaborative environment. This also helps communities to figure out what kind of health innovations they need [ 5 ]. Eventually, those collaborations help us to make a network of people with multiple expertise and impact on the society. Most of the time, translational research results can be used and influence society. This is generally done at one of three stages: initial research to influence, research that applies to society, or research on society. However, the important question is how can we get the next generation leaders interested in the translational research that can help people? Networks and the interactions may be the first step towards it.

Roles and responsibilities

Translational research is an interdisciplinary domain that combines scientific discoveries with practical applications in healthcare. Hence, it involves various roles and responsibilities, including basic researchers conducting fundamental research, clinical researchers conducting clinical trials. Translational scientists serving as a bridge between basic researchers and clinicians. Each role plays a vital role in bringing scientific discoveries to the forefront of patient care and public health. Each of the roles need to be defined properly with some flexibility to adapt and move forward. In case of more dynamic roles, a training and integration programme need to be designed.

Conclusions

It is worth taking the time to realise the complex nature of the translational research and their multiple components. We often focus on the outer circle (Fig.  1 ) which is technology or domain specific whereas inner circle which is mainly focused on the non-technical skills are also important. Over the years, translational research has traditionally followed the path of the technology outer circle in Fig.  1 , this has presented challenges because brilliant academic research has rarely translated effectively primarily because it is not directed at clinically critical questions as opposed to good science, as a result, the bench-to-bedside model, as outlined in this work, is evolving to recognize that it must be bed-to-bench-to-bed. To be successful in this area, a training programme in translational research must provide its trainees with exposure to and practise in a wide range of abilities that are typically not covered in a single curriculum. We, as a scientific community, need to welcome and develop multidisciplinary teams from across institutions into our labs, where they may be recognized and rewarded for taking on the difficult task of finding answers rather than raising additional questions. There is a long road ahead for the next generation of researchers who may not follow the standard path to success in academia, and it is imperative that we, as administrators, teachers, and mentors, continue to invest in them.

Multiple processes and steps around translational research is shown. The outer periphery is more on the translational processes and inner circles are more on the soft skills that require to execute the processes in the outer circles

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Mediouni MR, Schlatterer D, Madry H, Cucchiarini M, Rai B. A review of translational medicine. The future paradigm: how can we connect the orthopedic dots better? Curr Med Res Opin. 2018;34(7):1217–29.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Payne PR, Pressler TR, Sarkar IN, Lussier Y. People, organizational, and leadership factors impacting informatics support for clinical and translational research. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2013;13(1):20.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Williams J, Kolb HR. Communication in clinical research: Uncertainty, stress, and emotional labor. J Clin Transl Sci. 2022;6(1): e11.

Katzenbach JR and Smith. The wisdom of teams: creating the high performance organization. Boston: Havard Business School press; 1993.

Vicens Q, Bourne PE. Ten Simple Rules for a Successful Collaboration. PLoS Comput Biol. 2007;3(3):e44.

Download references

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank the reviewers for their constructive suggestions.

The author acknowledge support from the NIHR Birmingham SRMRC, HYPERMARKER (Grant agreement ID 101095480), and the MRC Heath Data Research UK (HDRUK/CFC/01), an initiative funded by UK Research and Innovation, Department of Health and Social Care (England) and the devolved administrations, and leading medical research charities. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the National Institute for Health Research, the Medical Research Council or the Department of Health.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Institute of Translational Medicine, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK

Animesh Acharjee

Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK

MRC Health Data Research UK (HDR UK), London, UK

Centre for Health Data Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Animesh Acharjee conceived the idea and designed the analysis; wrote, edited and reviewed the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Animesh Acharjee .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate, consent for publication, competing interests.

The author declared no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Acharjee, A. Translational research and key aspects to make it successful. transl med commun 8 , 19 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41231-023-00153-9

Download citation

Received : 08 June 2023

Accepted : 11 September 2023

Published : 18 September 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s41231-023-00153-9

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Translational research
• Project management

Translational Medicine Communications

ISSN: 2396-832X

• Submission enquiries: Access here and click Contact Us
• General enquiries: [email protected]

Skip to content

Initiatives and Committees

Plan your research, join a study, curated resources for research design and analysis.

This resource provides curated training content for a non-statistical audience: students, residents, fellows, early-stage investigators, or anyone wanting to learn more about research design and analysis . The current topics provide guidance on the fundamentals of study design and the site will expand to cover a broader range of common statistical topics.

How to N avigate

Each t opic is introduced into an o verview , with curated resources sectioned by modality: v ideos, w ebsites, r eadings, and other relevant c ourse s and s oftware if available. Within each section, resources are l oosely ordered by relevance and utility . Permanent links are provided where possible , however , we also equipped the w ebsite s section with a rchive links for alternative use if users experience inactive sites.  

• Designing and Refining a Research Question
• Specific Aims
• Confirmatory versus Exploratory Research
• Outcomes and Endpoints

Coming Soon

Future topics include clinical trial and observational designs ; understanding data through visualization and summary statistics ; methods for categorical analysis ; hypothesis testing theory and implementation ; and sample size and power calculations .

This resource is being developed and maintained by members of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Research Design (BERD) at the Columbia University Irving Institute for Clinical and Translational Research and is supported by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Institutes of Health, through Grant Number UL1TR001873. BERD does not take responsibility for any misuse or misinterpretation of the curated content. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH.  

To suggest additional topics or resources, alert us of problems with links, or share suggestions for improvement, email [email protected] .

• Biostatistics Education [email protected]

• History, Facts & Figures
• YSM Dean & Deputy Deans
• YSM Administration
• Department Chairs
• YSM Executive Group
• YSM Board of Permanent Officers
• FAC Documents
• Current FAC Members
• Appointments & Promotions Committees
• Ad Hoc Committees and Working Groups
• Chair Searches
• Leadership Searches
• Organization Charts
• Faculty Demographic Data
• Professionalism Reporting Data
• 2022 Diversity Engagement Survey
• State of the School Archive
• Faculty Climate Survey: YSM Results
• Strategic Planning
• Mission Statement & Process
• Beyond Sterling Hall
• COVID-19 Series Workshops
• Previous Workshops
• Departments & Centers
• Find People
• Biomedical Data Science
• Health Equity
• Inflammation
• Neuroscience
• Global Health
• Diabetes and Metabolism
• Policies & Procedures
• Media Relations
• A to Z YSM Lab Websites
• A-Z Faculty List
• A-Z Staff List
• A to Z Abbreviations
• Dept. Diversity Vice Chairs & Champions
• Dean’s Advisory Council on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer and Intersex Affairs Website
• Minority Organization for Retention and Expansion Website
• Office for Women in Medicine and Science
• Committee on the Status of Women in Medicine Website
• Director of Scientist Diversity and Inclusion
• Diversity Supplements
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Recruitment
• By Department & Program
• News & Events
• Executive Committee
• Aperture: Women in Medicine
• Self-Reflection
• Portraits of Strength
• Mindful: Mental Health Through Art
• Event Photo Galleries
• Additional Support
• MD-PhD Program
• PA Online Program
• Joint MD Programs
• How to Apply
• Advanced Health Sciences Research
• Clinical Informatics & Data Science
• Clinical Investigation
• Medical Education
• Visiting Student Programs
• Special Programs & Student Opportunities
• Residency & Fellowship Programs
• Center for Med Ed
• Organizational Chart
• Committee Procedural Info (Login Required)
• Faculty Affairs Department Teams
• Recent Appointments & Promotions
• Academic Clinician Track
• Clinician Educator-Scholar Track
• Clinican-Scientist Track
• Investigator Track
• Traditional Track
• Research Ranks
• Instructor/Lecturer
• Social Work Ranks
• Voluntary Ranks
• Adjunct Ranks
• Other Appt Types
• Appointments
• Reappointments
• Transfer of Track
• Term Extensions
• Timeline for A&P Processes
• Interfolio Faculty Search
• Interfolio A&P Processes
• Yale CV Part 1 (CV1)
• Yale CV Part 2 (CV2)
• Samples of Scholarship
• Teaching Evaluations
• Letters of Evaluation
• Dept A&P Narrative
• A&P Voting
• Faculty Affairs Staff Pages
• OAPD Faculty Workshops
• Leadership & Development Seminars
• List of Faculty Mentors
• Incoming Faculty Orientation
• Faculty Onboarding
• Past YSM Award Recipients
• Past PA Award Recipients
• Past YM Award Recipients
• International Award Recipients
• Nominations Calendar
• OAPD Newsletter
• Fostering a Shared Vision of Professionalism
• Academic Integrity
• Addressing Professionalism Concerns
• Consultation Support for Chairs & Section Chiefs
• Policies & Codes of Conduct
• Health & Well-being
• First Fridays
• Fund for Physician-Scientist Mentorship
• Grant Library
• Grant Writing Course
• Mock Study Section
• Research Paper Writing
• Funding Opportunities
• Join Our Voluntary Faculty
• Faculty Resources
• Research by Keyword
• Research by Department
• Research by Global Location
• Translational Research
• Research Cores & Services
• Program for the Promotion of Interdisciplinary Team Science (POINTS)
• CEnR Steering Committee
• Experiential Learning Subcommittee
• Goals & Objectives
• Issues List
• Print Magazine PDFs
• Print Newsletter PDFs
• YSM Events Newsletter
• Social Media
• Patient Care

INFORMATION FOR

• Residents & Fellows
• Researchers

Yale-NY Regional Head & Neck Translational Research Symposium

Yale-new york regional head & neck translational research symposium.

A diverse group of head and neck cancer investigators gathered last week on Yale University’s West Campus to discuss recent advances in research in a variety of topics, including novel targets, immunology, and racial disparities.

The April 12 symposium include researchers from institutions in the New York region including New York University, Einstein/Montefiore, Columbia University, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC), the University of Pennsylvania, and Temple University.

Hosted by Curtis R. Pickering, PhD and the Yale Head & Neck SPORE (the National Cancer Institute’s Specialized Programs of Research Excellence), the symposium included a keynote panel of Barbara Burtness, MD (Yale) , Nancy Lee, MD (MSKCC) , and Devraj Basu, MD, PhD (UPENN).

SPORE grants are a cornerstone of NCI’s efforts to promote collaborative, interdisciplinary translational cancer research. SPORE grants involve both basic and clinical/applied scientists, and support projects that will result in new and diverse approaches to the prevention, early detection, diagnosis and treatment of human cancers.

The afternoon symposium was the first of what many attendees said they hoped would become an annual event among collaborators from neighboring institutions. In addition to the keynote panel, the speakers included Marcus Schober, PhD; Flora Momen-Heravi DDS, MPH, PhD, MS; Luc Morris, MD, MSc, FACS; Ahmed Diab, PhD; Pedro Torres-Ayuso, PhD; TJ Ow, MD, MS; and Jeffrey Liu, MD.

Yale’s Head & Neck SPORE includes a five-year, $11.7 million grant from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). SPOREs bring together experts in oncology, immunobiology, pharmacology, molecular biology, pathology, epidemiology, and addiction science to collaborate on projects. The goal of the Yale Head and Neck Cancer SPORE (YHN-SPORE) is to address critical barriers to treatment of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) due to resistance to immune, DNA damaging, and targeted therapy.

PHOTO CAPTION: Symposium participants include Yale members Saral Mehra , MD, MBA, FACS (back row, far left); Sara Pai, MD. PhD (second row, left, wearing scraf); Curtis Pickering, PhD (second row, left, blue blazer and shirt); Barbara Burtness, MD (front row, left in front of podium); and Benjamin Judson, MD, MBA (front row, far right).

Featured in this article

• Barbara Burtness, MD Anthony N. Brady Professor of Medicine (Medical Oncology); Chief Translational Research Officer, Yale Cancer Center; Chief, Head and Neck Cancers/Sarcoma; Co-Leader, Developmental Therapeutics, Yale Cancer Center; Associate Cancer Center Director for Translational Research, Yale Cancer Center
• Benjamin L. Judson, MD, MBA Charles W. Ohse Professor of Surgery (Otolaryngology); Chief, Division of Otolaryngology, Yale Medicine; Vice Chair of Faculty Affairs, Surgery
• Saral Mehra, MD, MBA, FACS Associate Professor of Surgery (Otolaryngology); Section Chief, Head and Neck Surgery, Otolaryngology Surgery; Director, Head and Neck Oncologic and Reconstructive Surgery Fellowship, Surgery
• Sara Isabel Pai, MD/PhD
• Curtis R. Pickering, PhD

Jazz at Drew returns 09/21

• Clinical and Translational Science Institute (CTSI)

Institutions

The Clinical and Translational Science Institute is composed of four partnered institutions located in the Los Angeles County:

• University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA)
• Cedars-Sinai Medical Center (CEDARS-SINAI)
• Charles R. Drew University of Medicine and Science (CDU)
• Los Angeles Biomedical Research Institute at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center (LA BIOMED)

Visit the Main CTSI Partnership Website:  http://www.ctsi.ucla.edu/

As a partner of the UCLA-CTSI consortium, CDU has been able to leverage resources to engage in a multitude of activities with other CTSI partners. As a member of this consortium, CDU Investigators are eligible for various funding mechanisms under the CTSI.

UCLA Clinical and Translational Science Institute is a dynamic partnership of four institutions: Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Charles R. Drew University of Medicine and Science, Los Angeles Biomedical Research Institute at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, and the UCLA-Westwood Medical Center. Its mission is to bring UCLA innovations to bear on the greatest health needs of Los Angeles and the nation.

UCLA CTSI is organized into nine program areas that support a wide range of research. CTSI investigators tackle the most pressing challenges in addiction, cancer, disease prevention, heart disease, HIV, mental health, patient safety, stroke, and women’s health.

UCLA CTSI supports this work by providing seed grants, training, and access to specialized expertise or resources in the form of statisticians, computer databases, clinical tests, gene sequencers and other sophisticated, high-tech equipment, and study volunteers.

To achieve its mission, UCLA CTSI has formed collaborations with community organizations, health clinics and schools. These research partnerships ensure that its discoveries are relevant to the health needs of Los Angeles.

UCLA CTSI is one of 60 such institutes to receive a Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The NIH created the CTSAs to enhance the translation of basic research into drugs, medical devices, tools and interventions that improve health. Click here for more information about the national CTSA network.

The vision of the UCLA CTSI is a healthier Los Angeles County.  Explore UCLA CTSI projects at  http://www.ctsi.ucla.edu/ .

OVERVIEW OF PROGRAMS

http://www.ctsi.ucla.edu/about/pages/programs

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND RESEARCH PROGRAM (CERP) The CERP is the primary link to our diverse Los Angeles community. It builds community capacity to engage in research; communicates research findings; serves as a point of contact for community health care providers and facilitates opportunities for health services and comparative effectiveness research. Activities with CDU include:

• Collaboration with the Weingart YMCA in South Los Angeles in development to establish a Lifestyle Intervention and Food Education (LIFE) Center.
• CDU is one of 5 sites that has received collaborative funding from CTSI-LADHS to conduct an innovative program to deliver obesity services at DHS facilities.
• UCLA has drafted a process to facilitate dissemination and sustainability strategies for the Community Faculty Track at CDU.

Learn more at  http://www.ctsi.ucla.edu/about/pages/cer .

CENTER FOR TRANSLATIONAL TECHNOLOGIES (CTT) Center for Translational Technologies (CTT) links scientific teams with core technologies. It provides online access to and supervises the use of a diverse array of existing cores; supports development of new technologies; provides personalized counseling to help investigators select and use cores; and facilitates multidisciplinary collaborations and networking.

The voucher system for use of institutionally supported core is quite efficient. Investigators formulate translational projects with an emphasis on innovation. It provides investigators what they need as soon as possible to incentivize investigators to engage in translational research. To date CDU has awarded 7 investigators over $65k in voucher awards. Learn more at  http://www.ctsi.ucla.edu/research/pages/lab-research-facilities

CLINICAL AND COMMUNITY RESEARCH RESOURCES PROGRAM (CCRR) The CCRR supports and supervises human studies and clinical trials. It builds on our highly successful GCRCs to include flexible, mobile research units that bring scientific teams to our population. It provides bio-nutrition services, clinical research management, and clinical education and training opportunities. CDU has now partnered with Community-Based Research Institute to foster community research collaboration and resource utilization for clinical trials. This will allow efficiency by sharing resources. Learn more at  http://www.ctsi.ucla.edu/about/pages/ccr

REGULATORY KNOWLEDGE AND SUPPORT, INDUSTRY RELATIONS, AND RESEARCH ETHICS (REGULATORY) This program ensures that CTSI research is in full regulatory compliance and meets the highest quality assurance standards. Through its Office of Investigator Services, it functions as a gateway to CTSI investigator resources and provides a one-stop shop for protocol submissions. It actively seeks and encourages industry alliances and offers ethics counseling and research. Learn more at  http://www.ctsi.ucla.edu/about/pages/reg

BIOINFORMATICS INFORMATION PROGRAM (BIP) The BIP leverages the CTSI expertise and resources in data management to provide databases, tools, resources and infrastructure for the acquisition, storage and analysis of data. It provides the online infrastructure and support for the Office of Investigator Services.

CDU has taken lead in this area through several activities:

• Developed a governance process, participation agreement and initial architecture for the Los Angeles Data Resource (LADR) to be launched in the Fall of 2014.
• Begun development of a process for data transfer from participating organizations.
• Two CDU Faculty leads (Drs. Ogunyemi and Jenders) have provided training modules in Biomedical Informatics to CTSI partners. Presentations accessible at:  http://www.ctsi.ucla.edu/education/training/webcastmodules

Learn more at  http://www.ctsi.ucla.edu/about/pages/bip2 BIOSTATISTICS AND COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY PROGRAM This Program provides CTSI investigators with the integrated services and biostatistical support. Basic services include (1) contemporary data analysis methodology consultation, implementation, and epidemiology expertise; (2) the best available clinical data management software; (3) study design and grant preparation assistance; and (4) bioinformatics/computational biology data analysis. Learn more at  http://www.ctsi.ucla.edu/about/pages/bsd

RESEARCH EDUCATION, TRAINING & CAREER DEVELOPMENT (CTSI-ED) Research Education, Training, and Career Development Program (CTSI-ED) houses most of the CTSI education and training activities. It ensures CTSI trainees acquire the core competencies needed to conduct multidisciplinary research, and to integrate community priorities and input into research across the T1 to T4 spectrum.

Educational workshops have been made available to CDU’s campus via video-conferencing providing opportunities to learn about the latest technological advance in translational research, core services and the CTT Voucher funding mechanism.

As of 2014, two faculty from CDU have obtained KL2 awards from CTSI. -Dr. Amira Brown (2011):  http://www.ctsi.ucla.edu/education/pages/kl2-scholars -Dr. Piwen Wang (2013):  http://www.ctsi.ucla.edu/education/pages/kl2_scholars_2013

Learn more at  http://www.ctsi.ucla.edu/education/pages/award

EVALUATION AND TRACKING PROGRAM This program helps CTSI leaders set goals, measure outcomes, improve decision-making, and identify opportunities for improvement. Learn more at  http://www.ctsi.ucla.edu/about/pages/et

PILOT AND COLLABORATIVE TRANSLATIONAL AND CLINICAL STUDIES PROGRAM (PILOT/ COLLABORATIVE PROGRAM) This program drives research within the UCLA CTSI. It assembles new transdisciplinary teams among senior and junior investigators; provides seed funding; fosters collaborations among basic, clinical and community researchers; provides funding for development of novel methodologies and assists the transition of research from preclinical to Phase I clinical trials; recruits new translational faculty. Learn more at  http://www.ctsi.ucla.edu/about/pages/pil

CDU SITE CONTACTS Principal Investigator of CDU Site: Dr. Mayer Davidson [email protected]

Program Manager of the CDU Site: Ms. Maria Diaz-Romero Phone: 323-357-3691 Email:  [email protected]

Administrative Contact: Gregory Turner Email:  [email protected] .

• Research Administration
• Research Staff
• Clinical Research Education and Career Development (CRECD)
• Research Facilities
• CDU Patents
• Research Partners 
• Curricula, Training, and Internship
• Projects and Partners
• Publications
• CHW Resources
• Newsletters & Social Media
• People of the Academy
• Academy Alumni
• Frequently Asked Questions
• CDU Stanford REACH Initiative
• Scripps Research Translational Institute (SRTI)
• SART Seminars
• SART Summer Activities
• CDU Bridges Program (CDU Bridges)
• UHI Research Assistant (URA)

• UB Directory
• Clinical and Translational Science Institute >

Spirit of collaboration evident at 2024 CTSI Annual Forum

Pictured, clockwise from top left: Timothy F. Murphy, MD; Marc Halterman, MD, PhD; Ram Samudrala, PhD; Leonard H. Epstein, PhD, with Anne B. Curtis, MD; and Robert Fenstermaker, MD. Photos by Sandra Kicman.

Published April 17, 2024

A recurring theme during the University at Buffalo Clinical and Translational Science Institute (CTSI) Annual Forum on March 20 was the impact of and potential for collaboration to advance and accelerate research to reduce health disparities and improve community health. This theme was especially evident during the question and answer sessions following each presentation.

The diverse topics discussed at the forum, and presence of investigators from both UB and Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, confirmed Murphy’s pre-forum assessment that the yearly CTSI event is one highlighted by “extraordinary personal interactions and collaborative discussions.”

The day started with “Updates From NCATS,” presented by Jennie L. Conroy, PhD , Program Director, Division of Clinical Innovation, Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) Program Branch, National Center for Advancing Translational Science, NIH. Watch Conroy’s Annual Forum presentation here .

One of NCATS’ strategic goals, Conroy shared, is to “enable all people to contribute to and benefit from translational science. People are at the center of our translational research efforts. They are instrumental in identifying and addressing biomedical needs and opportunities.”

Conroy described how NCATS is developing a new strategic plan informed by public input.

“NCATS’ goals for the coming years are quite literally audacious — these goals are more treatments to all people more quickly,” Conroy said. “But what does that even mean? Right now, only 5% of diseases have a treatment, and one audacious goal is to get that number up so that 25% of known diseases have a treatment in the pipeline in the coming decade.”

Following Conroy with his annual “State of the CTSI” address was CTSI Director Timothy F. Murphy, MD , SUNY Distinguished Professor. Watch Murphy’s Annual Forum presentation here .

During his address, Murphy presented selected CTSI initiatives from 2015 to the present and explained how collaboration — with Buffalo Translational Consortium researchers, members of the community, and CTSA hubs — is driving the CTSI’s work and contributing to the CTSI’s success in advancing research discoveries that contribute to improved health and reduced health disparities.

Murphy highlighted the mission of academic medicine, which for years was represented by three core tenets — medical education, clinical care, and research — and now includes the important addition of community collaboration, to emphasize and recognize the value in engaging the community.

“Having a CTSA grant [means] you become part of a national consortium of more than 60 institutions, and these are the leading medical schools and universities and academic health centers in the country,” Murphy said. He described previous, current, and upcoming collaborations with multiple academic institutions across the CTSA consortium.

Murphy’s presentation also touched on the CTSI Translational Pilot Studies Program , and how it serves as a mentoring mechanism to train the next generation of clinical and translational science researchers.

Marc Halterman, MD, PhD , Senior Associate Dean and Executive Director, Office of Research, Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, provided the Annual Forum keynote, titled “Lung-brain Coupling in Acute Ischemic Stroke: Mechanisms and Therapeutic Opportunities.”

Halterman began his address by reflecting on Conroy’s earlier comments, specifically the need to find innovative ways to move toward accomplishing important, life-saving objectives.

“I am thinking about the comments from [Dr. Conroy] about what is really bold and what we need to do,” he said.

During his presentation, Halterman discussed the evolving understanding of organ-organ communication in the pathophysiology of acute ischemic stroke, and the therapeutic opportunities presented by various drug treatments.

“This is a very complex and somewhat nuanced problem that I think will require collaboration across disciplines,” he stated.

The Top Award recipient for the 2023 Buffalo Translational Consortium Clinical Research Achievement Awards, Leonard H. Epstein, PhD , SUNY Distinguished Professor and Division Chief, Behavioral Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, Jacobs School, explored partnership on a different front: bringing together families with multigenerational obesity and pediatricians to help all family members lose weight. Epstein’s study collaborators included CTSI Recruitment and Special Populations Core Director Teresa Quattrin, MD , UB Distinguished Professor, Department of Pediatrics, Associate Dean for Research Integration, Jacobs School.

Also presenting his work was 2023 Awards Finalist Robert Fenstermaker, MD , Professor of Neurosurgery and Oncology, Chair, Department of Neurosurgery, Director, Neuro-Oncology Program, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center. Fenstermaker’s presentation centered on his work investigating the combination of SurVaxM, a peptide vaccine targeting survivin (a molecule highly expressed by glioblastoma cells), with adjuvant temozolomide (TMZ) in patients newly diagnosed with glioblastoma.

The Annual Forum’s final presentation was delivered by 2023 Awards Finalist Ram Samudrala, PhD , Professor and Chief, Division of Bioinformatics, Department of Biomedical Informatics, Jacobs School, the developer of the Computational Analysis of Novel Drug Opportunities (CANDO) platform for multiscale therapeutic drug discovery, repurposing, and design. He discussed his research team’s work exploring combinations of drugs to treat lung cancer patients with a specific gene/protein mutation.

Videos of the BTC Clinical Research Achievement Awards presentations will be shared on the CTSI YouTube page in the coming weeks.

UB Clinical and Translational Science Institute Clinical and Translational Research Center 875 Ellicott Street Buffalo, NY 14203 Phone: 716-888-4850 Email:  [email protected]

Ellen Goldbaum Senior Medical Editor Office of University Communications

(716) 645-4605

[email protected]

RESEARCH NEWS

• 4/18/24 Scholars Popescu and Russo Elected AAAS Fellows
• 4/11/24 New Study Probes Macrophages’ Role in Pulmonary Fibrosis
• 4/3/24 Dubocovich’s Contributions to Translational Workforce Diversity, Inclusion Honored
• 3/13/24 Cancer and Nutrition Talk Wins Prize at 3MT Event
• 3/12/24 Elkin to Assume ACTS Board of Directors Role in April
• 2/26/24 Determined to Improve Cancer Care in Uganda

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• v.15(11); 2014 Nov

The steps from translatable to translational research

The common justification for much research funding is that the outcomes will move from the laboratory to the clinic and patient care, or be converted into jobs and money. The term “translational research” is widely used in this context by medical research institutes and an increasing number of university departments to convey the message to politicians and taxpayers that research activities ultimately serve the public. The intense focus on translation is also a result of the NIH road map and former NIH Director Elias Zerhouni, who deliberated on how to achieve this goal 1 , 2 .

However, in some cases, translational research is merely a label to attract financial support but in reality, it is not. A more analytical and stratified definition of “translation” would therefore provide greater transparency to a sector of research that heavily depends on public funding. It would also provide an instrument to understand better the nature of the research that is being undertaken in research institutes or university departments. Finally, anyone who is interested in an institute that claims to perform translational research would get an accurate picture of how that is being interpreted and carried out.

As a starting point, it is useful to distinguish between translational research proper and translatable research: research that potentially could lead to translation. Indeed, there is confusion that comes from a lack of precision or a failure to classify activities correctly. Some of this arises from the frequent mixing of the terms “translational medicine” and “translational research”. A more detailed classification would therefore help to describe where a given project is placed along the chain of events from “translatable research” to “translational research”. For example, the Translational Research Working Group I at the NIH uses a single term, “basic science discovery”—which is also labelled at T0—for all activities prior to clinical research ( http://www.cancer.gov/PublishedContent/Files/images/trwg/TRWG_Oct06RT_ExSum_11-21-06.pdf ; http://www.tuftsctsi.org/About-Us/What-is-Translational-Science.aspx?c=129047765594202220 ). A different approach by the Institute of Medicine’s Clinical Research Roundtable defines bottlenecks on the path to the clinic as T1—which prevent research findings being tested in the clinic—and as T2—which prevent the adoption of proven interventions as standard practice 3 .

The common classification of translational research after T0 distinguishes four phases 4 . T1 is when a new treatment is first tested in humans in phases 1 and 2 clinical trials. T2 is when the results from a statistically relevant number of patients from phases 2 and 3 demonstrate the efficacy of the new approach. T3 is the phase when the new treatment is being tested more generally including phase 3 clinical trials. T4 is translating the findings from T3 into population health.

Notwithstanding some of the ambiguities, this classification has helped to highlight the steps involved in translational medicine. The phase that is referred to as T0 has not benefitted from a similar definition, which has given rise to claims that research is translational when, in fact, it is translatable and often quite a distance away from translational medicine. To achieve some greater clarity, I propose a classification scheme that would help to define the steps in pre-clinical research from discovery to translation (Fig ​ (Fig1). 1 ). Some obvious variations on the scheme could serve a similar purpose to classify research with the aim of commercialisation. Analogous to the four phases of translational research, it distinguishes four phases of discovery D1 to D4.

D1 is pure basic research to gain knowledge. It is essential and the basis for the following stages, but does not itself focus on clinical use or any other application. This could, for example, include understanding fundamental aspects of cellular or molecular biology or developing algorithms to integrate complex data from different sources.

D2 is disease-related research or oriented/strategic research: the context is defined by a disease, and the work is designed to obtain new insight or a starting point for diagnosis, treatment or prevention. This could include, for example, genomewide association studies to search for disease-related genes, epidemiological studies to identify linkages between environmental factors and a disease, studies to establish a connection between imaging data and a disease or studies to correlate genomics or proteomics and a disease.

D3 is the phase when the initial outcome of D2 research—such as a target molecule or a metabolic pathway—has been identified and when its link to the disease is being investigated. This research would try to understand the mode of action or role in disease of a gene product identified in D2, investigate a cell type in the immune system that is a target for a pathogen or analyse imaging data of a specific locus in the brain that correlates with the onset of a disease.

D4 describes the phase when the target from D3 is manipulated in some way to confirm its disease association. This could be by identifying a small molecule that can alter the activity of the target in a model system, a diagnostic system based on a biomarker, or the stimulation or blocking of an immune response.

After successfully completing D4, the path to “real” translation or T1 is obvious and the product, treatment or diagnostic test can be moved into clinical research. Not all of these steps are obligatory though, depending on the purpose and the previous phase. For example, an epidemiology study from D2 could reveal a serious health risk caused by an environmental factor, and the result could be immediately integrated into public policy (T4). The discovery of a target in D2 could result in immediate T2 work if there is already a drug in use for a different indication that interferes with the new target.

To obtain a better understanding of an institution or research group that claims to perform translational research, the first step would be to collect data about every project. Typically, research groups work on a number of projects that can be classified as somewhere between D1 and T4. For instance, a basic research institute or university department will have a predominance of discovery and development-related research (D) as illustrated in Fig ​ Fig2. 2 . A research cluster in a clinical setting may have little D1 or D2 activity and an emphasis on the translation phases. A medical research institute might have a mixture of the discovery and clinical research with projects that are looking for disease relevant insights (D2-D4) and others that are fully in the translational T-spectrum. Each organisation could formulate a profile appropriate for its mission and background, and the categorisation proposed here would allow them to monitor progress towards that goal. By assessing the projects annually, it will also be possible to measure the progress of projects or the overall institution over time and to make decisions on investing in particular projects.

As with all such systems, there is of course the risk of manipulating the outcome. For example, the mis-defining projects could “hide” an activity that does not fit the organisation’s mission. Alternatively, the assessors could distort the results to make the institute appear to be more aligned with the wishes of the funders or management. Notwithstanding these caveats, a classification of pre-clinical research could be very instructive to see the range of profiles in a research ecosystem. It would also provide managers and directors with a handy tool to ensure that research projects are complementary, such that they achieve a maximum impact on health, well-being and other desired outcomes.

• Zerhouni EA. Science. 2003; 302 :63–72. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zerhouni EA. N Engl J Med. 2005; 353 :1621–1623. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sung NS, Crowley WF, Jr, Genel M, et al. JAMA. 2003; 289 :2635–2645. [ Google Scholar ]
• Khoury MJ, Gwimm M, Ioannidis JPA. Am J Epidemiol. 2010; 172 :517–524. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]

Projects with Promise

Vol. 28 No. 1

Translational Research Approaches in Land-Grant Institutions: A Case Study of the REDI Movement

• David. A. Julian
• Melissa C. Ross
• Kenyona N. Walker
• Gabrielle C. Johnson
• Ana-Paula Correia

In this case study we explore the concept of translational research: specifically, how common tools were employed in the context of the translational research process to design and implement a formal intervention to address racism at the individual and structural level. This approach to translational research focuses on the implementation of evidence-based interventions to address issues in communities, schools, and other organizations and is ideally suited to support researchers and practitioners in the nation’s land-grant institutions. We discuss the suitability of translational research as an approach to identifying and resolving issues and implications for training and day-to-day operations of translational research organizations. Finally, we point to the necessity of incorporating principles of equity and engagement in the translational research process.

Login Register

Forgot your password?

Correction: Evaluation of mAb 2C5-modified dendrimer-based micelles for the co-delivery of siRNA and chemotherapeutic drug in xenograft mice model

• Open access
• Published: 18 April 2024

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Satya Siva Kishan Yalamarty   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-2941-0754 1 ,
• Nina Filipczak 1 ,
• Tanvi Pathrikar 1 ,
• Colin Cotter 1 ,
• Janaína Artem Ataide 4 ,
• Ed Luther 2 ,
• Swarali Paranjape 1 &
• Vladimir Torchilin 1 , 3  

The Original Article was published on 20 March 2024

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Correction to: Drug Delivery and Translational Research https://doi.org/10.1007/s13346-024-01562-5

In the original online version of this article there were treatment groups missing in Fig.  6 . Following is the corrected Fig.  6 . The original article was corrected:

Weights of harvested tumors and livers in female and male mice. The tumors weights show the effectiveness of the treatment and the weights of the liver show the safety of the treatment, A  Tumor weights in female mice, B  Liver weights in female mice, C  Tumor weights in male mice, D  Liver weights in male mice

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Center for Pharmaceutical Biotechnology and Nanomedicine, Northeastern University, Boston, MA, 02115, USA

Satya Siva Kishan Yalamarty, Nina Filipczak, Tanvi Pathrikar, Colin Cotter, Swarali Paranjape & Vladimir Torchilin

Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Northeastern University, Boston, MA, 02115, USA

Department of Chemical Engineering, Northeastern University, Boston, MA, 02115, USA

Vladimir Torchilin

Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, SP, 13083-871, Brazil

Janaína Artem Ataide

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Satya Siva Kishan Yalamarty or Vladimir Torchilin .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Yalamarty, S.S.K., Filipczak, N., Pathrikar, T. et al. Correction: Evaluation of mAb 2C5-modified dendrimer-based micelles for the co-delivery of siRNA and chemotherapeutic drug in xenograft mice model. Drug Deliv. and Transl. Res. (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13346-024-01601-1

Download citation

Published : 18 April 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s13346-024-01601-1

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research