Kristina: “My lab works on understanding how immune cells make decisions. In the context of cancer, that can mean understanding the decision whether or not an immune cell kills a human (cancer) cell. Ultimately these decisions are driven at the molecular level. For example, when two cells interact with each other, there are molecules that bind together at the cell interface. One of the processes we study, is sometimes also called ‘the kiss of death’ between an immune cell and a tumor cell, is what we study. We also investigate which combination of molecules will drive the cell to make a certain decision. What we want to understand is how these molecular signals are sent and received and how they are integrated.“

Geert: “My group works on applications that use artificial intelligence (AI). Currently, we focus on oncological imaging, both in radiology and pathology. Historically, this field focused on helping clinicians with their daily tasks, for example, supporting radiologists trying to find prostate cancer in MRI images, and trying to make them more efficient, more consistent, and more accurate in their diagnoses. In recent years, however, it has moved towards research aimed at achieving a more fundamental understanding of disease processes. You can ask questions such as - how does the immune system interact with cancers in different circumstances? Why do some patients benefit from immunotherapy while others do not? This is more basic AI-driven oncological research, but still centered around imaging.” 

Sylvie: “In our lab we are interested in fundamental processes within the cell that normally function to prevent cancer from occurring, more specifically in DNA damage repair. We know that cancer often arises because of mutations in parts of our DNA. Luckily our cells have all kinds of mechanisms to repair DNA damage when it occurs, but mutations can be a  consequence of DNA repair that has failed - DNA damage that was not repaired properly.  We investigate why these DNA repair mechanisms are compromised in certain tumors and how this affects disease onset and therapy response.”

Kristina Ganzinger

Geert: “Like almost everybody, I've had people in my life affected by cancer, and I lost people in my family and in my circle of friends because of it. I don't think I would necessarily be a very good doctor. But as an engineer by training, I was looking for a field where I could contribute to improving the lives of cancer patients and supporting the physicians who treat them. For me, the combination of working in the hospital while being an engineer, using AI methodology and trying to bridge that gap, is what motivates my work.”

Kristina: “For me, my overarching dream is to understand nature better, and to use that understanding in a meaningful way. Looking at the kind of immune cell processes that we study, it’s clear that our work has medical relevance. Our immune system sometimes needs a bit of a hand, or needs to be restraint if it is getting out of control, and then we would like to have medicines that can ‘talk’ to the immune system. If we understand the ‘language’ of the immune system, we can better understand how to ‘talk’ to it through molecules. That is ultimately what my knowledge and work can contribute to.”

Geert Litjens. Scientist at Radboud UMC and Oncode Investigator.

Sylvie: “What drives me is the desire to better understand the processes involved in DNA damage and what goes wrong in cancer patients. For example, to eventually find ways to reactivate a certain DNA repair pathway. But that is one step beyond my lab’s focus. We study the fundamental principles of how biological processes should work, to enable others to develop clever ways to translate our finding into better treatments for patients. To do that, we first have to better understand the basic principles. We know that deficiencies in DNA repair pathways also cause unique vulnerabilities in tumors, that can be targeted with specific therapies. That is also an interest of my lab, to find novel vulnerabilities in tumors that might give rise to novel therapeutic interventions.”

Sylvie: ”Looking back, I had just returned from my postdoc abroad. This meant I wasn't fully aware of the funding landscape, didn’t have a strong network in the Netherlands, and had only just started building my own group. I needed all the support and knowledge I could get.

Joining Oncode Institute definitely helped me build my lab and my research. The base funding was very important. As a starting out group leader, having this base funding was the best thing that could happen. I could only get external grants if I had preliminary data, but as a beginner group leader, I didn’t have the financial means to generate this data. In a situation like this you can get stuck. You can have great ideas, but people don’t know it, because you haven’t demonstrated your ideas yet. Maybe also because they seem too wild and far-fetched. But those might actually be the ideas that are most promising. The base funding from Oncode Institute made it possible to do that ‘high-risk/high-gain’ research. We now receive big grants, because I was able to give my ideas a shot and get the preliminary work done. Another advantage of joining Oncode Institute is that I was able to build a big network and new collaborations.”

Kristina Ganzinger

Kristina: “I'm a biochemist and biophysicist. During my PhD, I worked on a project related to immunology and it fascinated me. I really see myself in between disciplines. What is really attractive about Oncode Institute is that it brings together a group of researchers who all share a passion for finding better ways to treat cancer. They come from all sorts of disciplines and have different angles to ‘attack’ the same problem through interdisciplinary research. I could see myself functioning very well in such an environment and I believe I bring a unique technological, and also conceptual, angle to it.”

Geert: “Our research focuses more and more on understanding disease processes, towards enabling treatment prediction or understanding why certain treatments do or do not work. Our research is therefore very aligned with what Oncode Institute is about. It is fundamental oncology research, trying to bridge the gap between academia and actual impact in order to put our research into practice.

I see a lot of opportunities for advancing fundamental oncological research with AI, and can therefore bring something new to the institute that it didn’t have. I believe the techniques that I work with on a daily basis can work really well in the context of more fundamental research.”

Kristina Ganzinger. Scientist at AMOLF and Oncode Investigator.

Sylvie: “Being part of Oncode Institute makes it really easy to create new collaborations. But also to take the necessary valorization steps to not only create scientific knowledge, but bring something meaningful to patients. The science is only the first step. As a lab, I would never have dived, for example, into a project that is now trying to find inhibitors for a certain protein that could be used in the clinic. This is a project that started years back because of Oncode Institute. I wouldn’t have had the knowledge to do it, and Oncode Institute was really helpful in providing the means and guidance, helping find the right collaborators, and facilitating access to the Oncode Drug Repurposing Library.

Being part of Oncode Institute helps you think of your projects in a more translational, patient-centric way. I'm a very fundamental scientist but in the end, of course, I do my research because I want to help patients. And talking to my business developer and going to the meetings has pushed me to think about valorization opportunities within my lab’s fundamental projects.”

Geert Litjen

Geert: “In my field, the research was initially very applied, supporting doctors. I am 100% confident that with enough high-quality data, we can build an AI system that can do specific tasks as good, if not better than a human doctor could. We can improve our research and its impact by integrating AI technology. If, over time, this becomes a standard consideration for fundamental oncological researchers, for me that would be a really nice result.

Fundamental oncological research is still a relatively new field for me. I think I've only scratched the surface of what is possible. Being part of Oncode Institute will help me understand what directions my research could take. I now see a million possibilities, so to say. And understanding which ones do and which ones don’t have potential to create impact, and why - that's something that Oncode Institute can definitely bring me.”

Kristina: “I'm really excited about connecting even more with people who work on the biological or biomedical side, to the point of interacting with patients in the clinic. These connections are not that easy to make for someone like me, who is based at a physics institute, even though I have this biomedical interest. That is something I look forward to and I feel will make my work stronger - bridging the physical sciences with the biomedical world.

Quite recently I discovered that some of my ideas and projects have real valorization potential. As someone driven by fundamental questions, I was a little surprised by just how excited I got about that - to see how certain results can be turned into something that a company may want to develop further, to make it available to society, either as a drug or as a technology that may be beneficial in a biomedical context. I am now learning the ropes, but even during these first few months of being part of Oncode Institute I have already experienced how beneficial it is.”