3D-Printed Neural Electrodes Can Be Tailored for Personalized Neural Monitoring
Researchers at Penn State University have developed a method to create 3D-printed soft electrodes that can conform to an individual brain surface to provide more accurate patient-specific tracking of biophysical signals in the brain. The study, published in Advanced Materials, details a new technique to create neural interfaces that improve upon current stiff methods to more closely conform to the complex structure of the brain.
“Each person has a different brain structure, depending on their height, weight, age, sex and more,” said Tao Zhou, PhD, Wormley Family Early Career Professor and corresponding author of the study. “Despite this, we try to fit neural interfaces onto brains like they have identical structures. This motivated us to create electrodes that are tailored for each individual, based on the structure of their brain.”
The new electrodes are created using hydrogel, a water-rich material that has properties similar to brain tissue, and built in a honeycomb-like internal structure to help balance flexibility and strength. These soft electrodes, dubbed HiPGE for honeycomb-inspired printable gel electrodes, are fabricated using a 3-D printing method called direct ink writing, which allows for precise shaping at very small scales. The honeycomb design reduces stiffness allowing the electrodes to stretch and conform to the brain’s ridges and grooves without damaging brain tissue.
To individualize the design process, a patient would first have an MRI scan, which is used to create detailed simulations of each brain scanned. The simulations inform the how to create the shape of each electrode so it aligns with the patient’s specific cortical folds. The team then 3D prints both the electrode and a model of the brain to test how closely the device fits. In experiments involving 21 human brain models, the printed electrodes demonstrated improved conformity compared to traditional designs.
“The unique gyral patterns of the human brain demand patient-specific neural interfaces to achieve precise neuromodulation, mitigate adverse tissue responses, and optimize therapeutic efficacy and safety,” the researchers wrote, noting that conventional rigid electrodes “exhibit limited conformability to the brain’s heterogeneous cortical topography,” resulting in “poor electrode-tissue contact, signal loss, and foreign body responses.”
To evaluate HiPGE performance and biological compatibility, the researchers conducted 28-day in vivo tests in rat models. Results from the tests showed that electrodes maintained stable function for the entire the testing period and did not trigger an immune response. The flexible electrodes also provided consistent and accurate readings of electrical and physiological signals in the brain.
Prior research has studied soft-material neural interfaces, but customization to individual gyral patterns has been limited. The introduction of a combined imaging, modeling and printing design workflow has solved this limitation by enabling electrodes to be tailored at the patient level.
The researchers wrote that the folded structure of the brain “creates a unique ‘fingerprint’ for each brain.” They also noted that current rigid devices can lead to “signal degradation due to scar formation,” and can create instability caused by the mismatch between the stiff neural interface materials and soft brain tissue.
Clinically, the improved contact between electrode and brain tissue could provide more reliable monitoring of neural activity, an important improvement for diagnosing and managing neurological conditions. Better signal fidelity could enhance applications such as brain-computer interfaces, neuroprosthetics, and neuromodulation therapies. The soft, conformable design may also reduce complications associated with long-term implantation, including inflammation and tissue damage.
“This tailored design ensures robust electrode-tissue integration, minimizing mechanical mismatch and improving signal fidelity during in vivo neural activity recording,” the researchers wrote. They added that studies “confirmed HiPGE’s biocompatibility, revealing no significant immune response or structural disruption to brain tissue.”
Future research will seek refine the technology for specific disease monitoring and exploring its use in clinical settings. They also aim to optimize the devices for targeted neurological conditions, which could inform the development of more precise and individualized care strategies.
The post 3D-Printed Neural Electrodes Can Be Tailored for Personalized Neural Monitoring appeared first on Inside Precision Medicine.
New KIR-CAR T Cell Therapy Shows Promise in Solid Tumors
Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapies have transformed the treatment of certain blood cancers, yet translating this success to solid tumors has remained a major challenge. One of the key obstacles has been T cell exhaustion, a state in which engineered immune cells lose their ability to sustain an effective anti-tumor response.
Now, early clinical data from a first-in-human Phase I trial suggest a new approach may help overcome this limitation. Presenting at the AACR annual meeting in San Diego, researchers from the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania report that a novel “KIR-CAR” T cell therapy shows promising safety and early efficacy signals across multiple solid tumor types.
New design inspired by natural killer cells
The investigational therapy, SynKIR-110, represents a departure from traditional CAR T designs. Rather than using a single-chain receptor, the therapy is modeled after natural killer (NK) cell receptors and uses a “multi-chain” architecture.
This design separates tumor recognition from activation, effectively creating an intrinsic “on-off” mechanism. The T cell remains in a resting state until it encounters its target, at which point the receptor components assemble to trigger an immune attack.
“The KIR-CAR design provides a natural ‘on-off’ mechanism, which helps avoid the problem of T cell exhaustion,” said Janos L. Tanyi, MD, PhD, principal investigator of the study. “The CAR turns on when it finds its target, kills it, and then rests, rather than constantly burning energy.”
This contrasts with conventional CAR T cells, which remain continuously active and can become depleted over time, limiting their effectiveness—particularly in the more complex microenvironment of solid tumors.
Early clinical signals in difficult-to-treat cancers
The Phase I dose-escalation trial enrolled nine patients with advanced, mesothelin-expressing cancers, including ovarian cancer, mesothelioma, and cholangiocarcinoma. These patients had limited treatment options, having received an average of four prior lines of therapy.
Although the primary goal of the study was to assess safety, early signs of efficacy were observed. Disease stabilization was reported in four patients, and one patient in the highest dose cohort achieved an ongoing partial response.
“These are cancer types that have never had an approved cell therapy,” Tanyi said. “We’re seeing good efficacy signals, even at low doses, and limited toxicity.”
The results suggest that the therapy may be able to generate meaningful anti-tumor responses even in heavily pretreated populations.
Favorable safety profile
Safety has been another major barrier for CAR T therapies, particularly in solid tumors. However, the KIR-CAR approach appears to mitigate some of these concerns.
No dose-limiting toxicities were observed in the initial cohorts. Cytokine release syndrome (CRS), a common side effect of CAR T therapy, occurred in 33% of patients but was limited to low-grade events. Notably, there were no cases of immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS), a more severe complication sometimes seen with CAR T therapies.
The ability to limit toxicity while maintaining activity is a key step toward broader application of cell therapies in solid tumors.
Targeting mesothelin across tumor types
SynKIR-110 targets mesothelin, a protein expressed on the surface of several solid tumors but largely absent from normal tissues. This makes it an attractive target for immunotherapy, particularly in cancers such as ovarian cancer and mesothelioma, where treatment options are limited.
The trial results indicate that the therapy’s activity is not confined to a single tumor type, raising the possibility of broader applicability across mesothelin-expressing cancers.
Expanding CAR T into solid tumors
The findings come amid growing efforts to adapt CAR T technology for solid tumors. While the approach has revolutionized hematologic malignancies, solid tumors present additional challenges, including immunosuppressive microenvironments, physical barriers to T cell infiltration, and antigen heterogeneity.
Researchers are exploring multiple strategies to address these barriers, including improved targeting, combination therapies, and next-generation receptor designs such as KIR-CAR.
As noted by CAR T pioneer Carl June, MD, advancing cellular therapies into solid tumors remains a central goal for the field.
Looking ahead
The Phase I study is ongoing, with plans to enroll up to 42 patients and identify the maximum tolerated dose before advancing to a Phase II trial. Early data indicate that CAR T cell expansion in the blood increases with dose, suggesting that higher doses may further enhance efficacy.
While still preliminary, the results highlight the potential of multi-chain CAR designs to address one of the most persistent challenges in cell therapy: maintaining durable activity without excessive toxicity.
If confirmed in larger studies, KIR-CAR therapies could represent a new generation of engineered immune cells, ones that more closely mimic natural immune regulation while retaining the precision of targeted cancer therapy.
For now, the data offer an encouraging signal that the next wave of CAR T innovation may finally extend the reach of cell therapy into solid tumors, where the need remains greatest.
The post New KIR-CAR T Cell Therapy Shows Promise in Solid Tumors appeared first on Inside Precision Medicine.
Lilly to Acquire Kelonia for Up to $7B, Expanding Cancer Cell Therapy Pipeline
Eli Lilly has agreed to acquire Kelonia Therapeutics for up to $7 billion, the companies said today, in a deal that would bolster the buyer’s oncology pipeline with an early clinical phase lentiviral in vivo chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR T) therapy under study in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.
Kelonia’s lead program KLN-1010 is a one-time intravenous gene therapy designed to generate anti-B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) CAR T cells, targeting the BCMA protein expressed on the surface of multiple myeloma cells.
In December at the American Society of Hematology (ASH) 2025 Annual Meeting, Kelonia presented positive early clinical data for KLN-1010 from the Phase I inMMyCARTM trial (NCT07075185). The data showed the CAR T therapy to have 100% minimal residual disease (MRD)-negative response rate across four patients, all of whom remained in response through the longest follow up of five months.
Those and other results, according to the company, provided initial clinical validation of KLN-1010 and demonstrated promising tolerability. In January, Kelonia won FDA clearance for an investigational new drug (IND) application for KLN-1010, enabling the trial to expand from Australia into multiple clinical sites across the United States.
“The early clinical data for KLN-1010 are highly encouraging, both as a potential step forward for patients with multiple myeloma and as proof of concept for Kelonia’s platform,” Jacob Van Naarden, executive vice president and president of Lilly Oncology and head of corporate business development, said in a statement.
Investors appeared more sanguine about the Kelonia acquisition as Lilly shares were all but flat in early Monday trading as of 11 a.m. ET, to $927.16 from Friday’s close of $927.03. Kelonia is privately held.
KLN-1010 applies the company’s in vivo gene placement system (iGPS®), which uses engineered lentiviral-based particles designed to efficiently and selectively enter T-cells inside the body, enabling a patient’s own body to generate CAR T therapies designed to treat underlying disease.
Lilly and Kelonia reason that KLN-1010 could transform treatment of multiple myeloma by eliminating challenges associated with both ex vivo patient-specific cell therapy manufacturing, and pre-administration chemotherapy.
“Autologous CAR T therapies have meaningfully improved outcomes for patients with various cancers, but significant manufacturing, safety, and access barriers mean that only a fraction of eligible patients actually receive them,” Van Naarden added. “Kelonia’s in vivo platform has the potential to change that by delivering rapid, durable responses in a far simpler, off-the-shelf format.”
Kelonia marks Eli Lilly’s fourth announced acquisition of a smaller biotech this year:
- In March, Lilly committed up to $7.8 billion to acquire Centessa Therapeutics, a developer of sleep disorder drugs.
- A month earlier, Lilly announced plans to buy out circular RNA cell therapy developer Orna Therapeutics for up to $2.4 billion, targeting advancements in cell therapy.
- And in January, Lilly inked a $1.2 billion acquisition of Ventyx Biosciences, an NLRP3-targeting oral drug developer focused on inflammatory diseases.
Behind the deals
Behind all the deals is the pharma giant’s desire to capitalize on the billions of dollars it is generating from sales of its obesity and diabetes drugs based on glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor analysts alone or in tandem with a glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP). Lilly markets tirzepatide, a GLP-1/GIP dual agonist, in obesity as Zepbound® ($13.542 billion in 2025 sales) and in diabetes as Mounjaro® ($22.965 billion).
Lilly stands to generate even more in obesity-related sales in coming years once it brings to market its oral obesity drug Foundayo
(orforglipron), a small molecule GLP-1 receptor agonist—though analysts predict the drug’s 2026 sales will likely be lower than once expected because of the price war Foundayo faces competing head to head with Lilly’s arch-rival in obesity drugs, Novo Nordisk. In December, Novo Nordisk got a jump on Lilly when the Danish biotech giant won FDA approval for oral Wegovy® (semaglutide), a once-daily 25 mg GLP-1 receptor agonist tablet indicated for chronic weight management.
A Lilly buyout of Kelonia could compel Johnson & Johnson to take a closer look at acquiring Legend Biotech, Kostas Biliouris, PhD, a managing director on the biotechnology research team of Oppenheimer, wrote Sunday in a research note. He cited the fact J&J’s Janssen Biotech successfully partnered with Legend to develop Carvykti® (ciltacabtagene autoleucel), a B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-directed CAR T-cell therapy indicated for adults with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma who have received at least one prior line of therapy. Carvykti generated $1.877 billion in sales last year, up nearly double (96%) from $963 million in 2024.
Also, Biliouris cited the presence in Legend’s pipeline of LUCAR-G39D, a clinical in vivo CAR T program designed to treat B-cell non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma by targeting CD19xCD20. LUCAR-G39D showed positive first-in-human safety and efficacy data from a Phase I trial (NCT06395870) at ASH last December.
“We believe in vivo CAR T technology has strong potential, as treatment process is fast and circumvents the need for lymphodepletion, but think it will likely take ~6-8years before safety/durability questions are addressed, and regulatory approval is granted,” Biliouris predicted.
Lilly has agreed to acquire Kelonia for $3.25 billion upfront plus up to $3.75 billion in future payments tied to achieving specified clinical, regulatory, and commercial milestones. The acquisition deal is subject to regulatory approvals and other customary closing conditions, and is expected to close in the second half of 2026.
Upon closing, Lilly said, it will determine how to account for the transaction in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), then reflect the deal in future financial results and financial guidance.
“Kelonia’s leadership in advancing the immense promise of in vivo cell therapy is unmatched, extending its reach and impact beyond the traditional boundaries of personalized medicine,” Kelonia CEO Kevin Friedman, PhD, stated. “We have demonstrated the ability to achieve deep multiple myeloma remissions with significantly reduced complexity and cost relative to ex vivo CAR T-cell approaches.”
“In combination with Lilly’s strengths, our in vivo iGPS platform is positioned to broaden the reach of cell therapy beyond the current CAR T landscape in hematologic malignancies and to transform treatment across a far wider range of cancers and other serious diseases,” Friedman added.
The post Lilly to Acquire Kelonia for Up to $7B, Expanding Cancer Cell Therapy Pipeline appeared first on GEN – Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology News.
Distinct Nature of Parkinson’s Disease Gut Microbiome Identified
Research led by University College London has characterized a specific gut microbiome signature found in people with Parkinson’s disease.
Writing in Nature Medicine, the researchers also found that people carrying a genetic mutation in the GBA1 gene that put them at risk of developing Parkinson’s disease had gut microbiomes similar to people with the condition.
Parkinson’s is the second most common neurodegenerative disease in the U.S. after Alzheimer’s disease affecting more than one million people across the country. By the time full-blown motor symptoms emerge, a large degree of neurological damage has already occurred, so much work is underway to find ways to predict and diagnose early disease, as well as to develop more effective treatments.
“In recent years there has been a growing recognition of the links between Parkinson’s disease—a brain disorder—and gut health,” said co-lead author Anthony Schapira, MD, a professor at UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, in a press statement.
“Here we have strengthened that evidence and shown that microbes in the gut can reveal signs of Parkinson’s and may be an early warning signal… years before symptom onset.”
For this study, the researchers evaluated gut microbiome samples from 271 Parkinson’s disease patients, 43 people carrying GBA1 risk variants who did not yet have disease symptoms and 150 healthy controls. They also validated their findings in a further 638 people with Parkinson’s and 319 healthy controls from the U.K., Korea, and Turkey.
Schapira and team used DNA sequencing to see which bacterial species were present in each person’s gut. Comparing people with Parkinson’s disease to healthy controls, they found 176 bacterial species that were more or less common in people with the condition.
For example, people with Parkinson’s had more potentially pro‑inflammatory bacteria, including Bifidobacterium longum and B. dentium, Streptococcus mutans, and Lactobacillus paragasseri, than healthy controls.
In contrast, healthy controls had more helpful, butyrate‑producing gut bacteria from including Roseburia intestinalis, R. inulinivorans and some Faecalibacterium species and less pro-inflammatory species.
Notably, people in the at-risk group who carried a GBA1 risk variant had a gut microbiome somewhere between healthy controls and people with Parkinson’s, suggesting that the composition of microbes in the gut may change over time as the disease develops. In this group, 142 of the 176 species that differed in people with Parkinson’s versus healthy controls also showed changed abundance.
“For the first time we identify bacteria in the gut of people with Parkinson’s that can also be found in those with a genetic risk for the disease, but before they develop symptoms. Importantly, these same changes can be found in a small proportion of the general population that may put them at increased risk for Parkinson’s,” said Schapira.
“This discovery opens the way not only to see if the bacteria are a way to identify those at risk of Parkinson’s, but also to see if changing the bacterial population, through dietary changes or medication, can reduce a person’s risk for Parkinson’s.”
The post Distinct Nature of Parkinson’s Disease Gut Microbiome Identified appeared first on Inside Precision Medicine.
STAT+: Trump order to advance psychedelic treatments generates excitement — and worries
President Trump’s executive order aimed at loosening restrictions on psychedelics as mental health treatments was largely applauded by advocates. But some also quietly worry the White House’s role in trying to bolster the field risks politicizing it and undermining the credibility of research.
The order, which was reported to have stemmed at least in part from a text podcaster Joe Rogan sent Trump about psychedelics research, directs the Food and Drug Administration to expedite the review of some compounds and calls for the establishment of a new regulatory pathway for experimental psychedelics to be tried by terminally ill patients. It also allocates funding to states developing research programs.
While the order does not actually reschedule any drugs or change legislation, many advocates and researchers welcomed the move, saying it signals the administration’s interest in advancing psychedelics as treatments and could help ease bottlenecks in expanding access.
Opinion: The contradiction at the heart of Republicans’ embrace of psychedelics
On Saturday, with podcaster and psychedelics fan Joe Rogan standing over his shoulder, President Trump signed an executive order intended to expand access to psychedelics for mental health treatment.
For some, it may come as a surprise to see a Republican president embrace psychedelics. But he’s only the most recent member of the GOP to hop on the psychedelics bandwagon.
AACR 2026: Cancers of Unknown Primary Identified by DNA Methylation AI Model
SAN DIEGO – Researchers from Kindai University in Japan have developed a machine learning model that accurately predicts the origin of diverse cancer types in patients with cancers of unknown primary (CUP) by analyzing CpG-based DNA methylation. Results showed that the model correctly identified the cancer type in about 95% of cases in the test cohort, and achieved 87% accuracy when applied to an independent validation cohort from 31 cases representing 17 different cancer types. The work was presented at the American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) Annual Meeting.
“Our findings suggest that DNA-based approaches can help identify where a cancer may have started, even when the original tumor is not visible,” said Marco A. De Velasco, PhD, a faculty member in the department of genome biology at Kindai University in Japan.
CUP are metastatic malignancies in which the primary cancer site could not be identified. These cancers are often associated with poorer outcomes, as patients are typically treated with broad, nonspecific chemotherapy regimens rather than therapies targeted to a specific cancer type.
Approximately only 15-20% of patients with CUP show features that allow site-specific therapies. Patients receiving site-directed therapy can survive up to 24 months, compared with six to nine months for those receiving standard treatment.
Patterns in tumor biology, such as gene activity or chemical modifications to DNA, can differ between cancer types and persist even after the cancer has spread and guide development of these therapies. While some methods have shown promise, they have yet to demonstrate clear survival benefits in clinical trials.
The model was developed using methylation data from nearly 7,500 patients with 21 different cancer types obtained from The Cancer Genome Atlas Program and other public datasets. Using machine learning, the researchers identified CpG methylation and built methylation profiles that were associated with different tumor types.
Del Velasco emphasized that the study achieved high accuracy in predicting the origin of diverse cancer types using a small subset of DNA markers, about 1,000 CpG regions selected from hundreds of thousands across the genome. “This is important because it shows that we can simplify complex molecular data while still maintaining strong predictive performance,” he said.
As a limitation, the model was developed using cancers with known origins, rather than true CUP. Testing in CUP patients is important to understand how well the model performs in clinical settings. Additionally, not all tumors are easily accessible for genetic testing, particularly tumors in advanced stage. Looking ahead, the authors aim to adapt and evaluate the model using blood-based biopsy to analyze circulating tumor DNA instead of relying on DNA from tissue samples.
The post AACR 2026: Cancers of Unknown Primary Identified by DNA Methylation AI Model appeared first on GEN – Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology News.
AACR 2026: David Parkinson and the Arc of Modern Cancer Therapy
SAN DIEGO, CA – In 1977, when David R. Parkinson, MD, graduated from medical school at the University of Toronto and moved to McGill University to train in internal medicine and eventually hematology, the idea of medical oncology was in its infancy. In Canada, the profession didn’t exist.
“In Canada, there were no medical oncologists,” Parkinson told Inside Precision Medicine. “Radiation therapists administered what little chemotherapy existed. They resisted the development of medical oncology as a specialty.”

Through the ensuing 49 years, Parkinson didn’t just see the rise of kinase inhibitors, antibodies, and cell therapies in real-time—he helped create the world of modern cancer therapeutics.
In reflecting on his remarkable career, which was recognized with the 2026 AACR Outstanding Achievement Award for Service to Cancer Science and Medicine, Parkinson said, “I’ve essentially grown alongside the field.”
From scarcity to structure: Oncology’s early years
When Parkinson arrived in Montreal, there were only a handful of chemotherapeutics available. “In those days, there were only one or two drugs available for hematologic malignancies across the entire field,” Parkinson said. “The main treatments were cyclophosphamide and nitrosoureas.”
Even supportive care lagged. “Initially, we had no effective way to control chemotherapy-induced nausea,” he noted of the standard of care for testicular cancer. “Some patients stopped treatment because they couldn’t tolerate it.”
Parkinson explained that early cancer drugs worked best on rapidly dividing tumors, like leukemias and testicular cancers, because that’s what the animal models represented. These therapies targeted DNA and cell division broadly, often with severe toxicity, and were far less effective against slower-growing solid tumors.
After his residency at McGill, Parkinson moved to Boston, first to Tufts New England Medical Center on a modest Canadian fellowship that placed him at the edge of a field just beginning to coalesce. “I was on a Canadian fellowship earning $12,000 a year,” he said. “The exchange rate fluctuated significantly, which made things difficult, and I couldn’t work due to my student visa.”
What he found, however, was momentum. Through connections with Dana-Farber, Parkinson entered formal training in medical oncology as the specialty began to take shape. “I connected with Dana-Farber and took their introductory course for fellows—that was my entry into medical oncology.”
At the same time, breakthroughs in specific cancers hinted at what might be possible. “What really shaped my thinking was the emergence of treatments for testicular cancer just as I entered oncology,” he said. “Platinum-based therapies—and later combination regimens—felt like miracles. We had never seen anything like it. These were often young patients, difficult to manage, but suddenly there were real cures.”
Targeted therapy and the Gleevec moment
Parkinson’s career soon intersected with early efforts to harness the immune system against cancer—decades before immunotherapy became a dominant paradigm. “I became deeply involved in immunotherapy, particularly interleukin-2 and early tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte studies,” he said.
Working at the National Cancer Institute (NCI), he collaborated with leaders, including immunotherapy pioneer Steven Rosenberg, MD, PhD, maintaining a hybrid role that combined research with clinical care. “At the same time, I continued clinical work for a couple of months each year, collaborating with Steve Rosenberg in the surgical branch.”
These early approaches were technically challenging and often unpredictable, but they laid the groundwork for later advances. “We started with basic approaches, moved to tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, and eventually to engineered CAR T cells,” Parkinson said. “Progress has been steady, though often slower than those treating patients would like.”
If immunotherapy represented one trajectory, targeted therapy represented another—one that depended on a deeper understanding of cancer biology.
“When I joined Novartis in the late 1980s, we were among the first developing kinase inhibitors,” Parkinson said. At the time, the idea was controversial. “Early skepticism suggested kinase inhibitors wouldn’t work due to high intracellular ATP levels and structural challenges.”
But advances in molecular biology were beginning to change the landscape. The discovery of the Philadelphia chromosome and its associated oncogene created a clear therapeutic target. “The Philadelphia chromosome had been known since the 1960s, and by the 1980s the responsible gene was identified,” Parkinson explained.
The result was imatinib (Gleevec), a drug that would become a prototype for precision oncology. “Eventually, a small molecule inhibitor was developed that targeted it precisely.”
The clinical results were extraordinary. “By the third cohort in a Phase I trial, patients with chronic myelogenous leukemia showed dramatic responses—some within 24 hours,” Parkinson said. “It’s probably the only Phase I oncology trial where essentially every patient achieved remission.”
For Parkinson, the implications extended far beyond a single drug. “Of course, [Gleevec] was a unique case,” he said. “But it proved an important point: what once seemed impossible can become possible.”
Since then, the field has expanded dramatically. Hundreds of kinase inhibitors have been developed, with thousands more explored, reflecting a broader shift toward therapies grounded in specific molecular mechanisms.
Precision medicine—and its limits
As oncology evolved, so too did its language. “For years, we called it ‘personalized medicine,’” Parkinson said. “I used to joke that medicine has always been personalized—you’re always trying to determine what’s best for a specific patient in a specific context.”
He credits industry with popularizing a more precise term. “Although Pfizer popularized the term ‘precision medicine,’ I think it’s a better term,” he added, with a note of humor: “I have a few good Pfizer jokes—best shared over a drink.”
Yet the reality of precision medicine has proven more complex than its promise. “The evolution of therapeutics mirrored the models and biological understanding available,” Parkinson said. “Targeted therapies only emerged once we understood the biology. Diagnostics, however, lagged by about two decades.”
That lag remains a structural challenge. Parkinson founded a diagnostics company based on single-cell signaling technology developed at Stanford. “Technically, it worked—we solved major challenges in instrumentation, standardization, and analysis,” he said. “But we couldn’t establish a viable business model.”
The core issue was reimbursement. “Without adequate reimbursement from Medicare, even highly sophisticated diagnostics struggle commercially,” said Parkinson. “Better diagnostics can reduce the use of expensive drugs by identifying who won’t benefit—something that doesn’t always align with pharmaceutical business models.”
In recent years, Parkinson has focused increasingly on large-scale data integration, including his involvement with the GENIE consortium. The initiative aggregates genomic and clinical data across institutions, aiming to accelerate discovery and improve clinical decision-making. “GENIE has been a technical success,” he said. “But its long-term sustainability remains uncertain.”
The broader challenge, he argues, is conceptual as much as technical. “Looking forward, the field is evolving toward integrating multiple data types—genomics, transcriptomics, imaging, and more—to better understand tumor biology,” he said. “Sequencing alone isn’t enough. The challenge now is not a lack of data, but making sense of it—something where artificial intelligence will play an increasingly important role.”
Back to basics
Across academia, government, and industry—including roles at the NCI, Novartis, Amgen, and Biogen Idec—Parkinson sees a single throughline. “I remember an interview with a biotech company where an HR representative told me, ‘You seem to have done a lot of different things,’” he said. “I responded that I had really only done one thing: trying to improve cancer treatment, just from many different angles.”
Not every effort succeeded. “In one case, we developed a drug that performed beautifully in mice but failed in human trials,” he said. “That’s common in oncology—most ideas don’t translate. You don’t think of it as failure but as learning. Still, there’s a limit to how many ‘learnings’ one can appreciate.”
Reflecting on decades of progress, Parkinson emphasizes both how far the field has come and how much remains unresolved. “Outcomes have improved dramatically across several cancers, especially hematologic ones,” he said.
Yet he underscores a fundamental principle: that progress in cancer treatment comes down to understanding biology. “The better we understand it, the more effectively we can develop targeted therapies,” said Parkinson. “Without that understanding, we’re essentially guessing.”
At AACR 2026, Parkinson’s recognition underscores not just past achievements but a continuing trajectory—one shaped by the interplay of discovery, failure, and persistence. “Despite all the challenges,” he said, “[precision medicine] is still the most promising path forward.”
The post AACR 2026: David Parkinson and the Arc of Modern Cancer Therapy appeared first on Inside Precision Medicine.
Correction: Promoting Sustained Real-Life Benefits of Virtual Reality–Based Interventions in People With Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders: Qualitative Study
.

