Mike Burgess, European Head of Oncology Clinical Research and Exploratory Development, Hoffmann-La Roche

Whenever you ask people about Mike Burgess you always get the same response... an intake of breath and then something like "he's so committed to what he does...". Indeed such is his presence and leadership at Roche (as European Head of Oncology Clinical Research Exploratory Development) that before speaking to him I confess to being a little nervous. What if he is intimidating? What if he speaks overwhelmingly in science grandiose and oncological jargon that is beyond me as a 'basic biochemist'? What if he doesn't even manage to make the time to talk? What if he thinks the changes in relationships are too facile a conversational subject when he is tasked with bringing an entire oncology pipeline to fruition on behalf of a company who are openly ambitious about their innovation prowess but much more guarded when one tries to learn more about their company personality?

In short, would the interview be a polite, but firm, series of company-clean soundbites?

No. Mike Burgess most certainly is at the top of his tree; but he also still has his feet firmly planted on the ground of common sense — which he attributes to his four rambunctious children and a grounding in working with children on paediatric oncology wards early in his career. Indeed, his first question to me is to make sure I am ok (having just returned to work after growing a human!). Mike attributes his highly-regarded working ethics to the time of his 'clinical and research apprenticeship' alongside people like Professor Tony Oakhill, Professor Gordon McVie and Doctor Kapil Dhingra who have worked exclusively as Academic Clinicians, Translational Scientists and for the pharmaceutical industry respectively. Mike describes that each individual have been inspirational to him because for similar reasons within their specialism in that they "didn't shirk from difficult decisions, were not afraid to stick their neck out to move things forward and have a genuine thirst to advance medical science and patient care." Accordingly, Doctor Burgess firmly believes that stronger alignments between industry and the medical/academic community are the only way to harness improvements for patients — especially in the challenges of conquering cancer.

It took an assertive phone call from someone at Lilly who had spotted Mike's potential to pull him from the Cancer Research Campaign Lab he was then in and bring him into big pharma and all the research and clinical trial opportunities that these companies can provide. After 7 years at Lilly, Mike joined Roche where he is able to funnel his obsession to improve outcomes in, and treatments for, cancer because he is tasked with designing the European phase 1 clinical trial and phase clinical trial proof-of-concept studies in this area. Mike continues to find this an overwhelmingly positive role because it enables him to continue to work alongside the 'cancer greats'. Asked if the notion of 'influencing Key Opinion Leaders' irks him, his response is one of humility — "I am aware that there is a Legacy being built in the interactions with regard to the work that we all want to do and the clinical goals we all need to achieve. And personally, because I have an industry title I've been able to interact with a level of people that I would not have been able to if I was chugging away in a small research lab somewhere. But this isn't just because I can pay grant money for studies. We are all interested in the research and the tools pharma brings to table. We can talk as equals... nothing goes forward if it is bad science."

As such it is interesting that Mike has noted that pharma "can no longer be regarded as a career for those without any other ambitions" which was the general feeling eschewed by his then-colleagues when he joined Lilly. Mike recalls that "a lot couldn't understand why I would move - the only impression they had of industry was that of the archetypal 'pushy' drug rep trying to sell them the latest version of a product... they couldn't shake that misperception off and considered my move to be to an inferior position." Mike remains disappointed, that today there is still a lack of appreciation or upfront communication to aspiring clinical academics/medical students for the prospect of a valuable and exciting career within pharma - which he believes is accompanied by poor teaching about clinical trial methodology and generally poor training in clinical pharmacology. He hopes that will change, however, as world-renowned Clinical Academics like Steven Friend, David Lane and Alex Markham (and his very good self) take up positions in industry. Mike is contemplative about this change in perspective and also about what an ambitious industry physician/researcher needs to do to stand out - "There was a period where pharma was a safe harbour for physicians who weren't necessarily making it in the clinical world - almost as landed gentry used to find themselves in the Church. Now I'd say all the brightest people aspire to have some sort of association with pharma, especially so with the emergence of the biotech industry. But my recommendation is to get out and do your clinical apprenticeship. Learn about how a drug can make a difference to one patient. This is then elevated within pharma where you have to apply that learning and think about how to make a difference to a population of patients. That's a steep learning curve with considerable responsibility - certainly not the easy route and not a way of running from the logistics and routine of clinical life."

Mike realises that it is easier to criticize industry as influencing the medical community than to make corrective steps to improve understanding about the clinical trial environment. He feels, "We ought to be doing more to educate young doctors... membership exams should include testing about the clinical trial as an instrument to assess quality of medical care and principles of clinical and statistical significance should be taught much earlier." Mike finds it ironic that mainstream media is flooded with claims about healthcare products that are not substantiated when pharmaceutical products are so heavily scrutinized. He also feels it "would be interesting to get the stats on how many times pharma is mentioned in a negative light..." No stranger to the ethical arguments about pharma's profits, Mike iterates that "yes, there's a profit element with industry that automatically makes people concerned, but governments are free to produce products at cost and to research and make medicines but they don't have infrastructure - new treatments and their validation require investors and a reason for investment. But there are also people investing a lot time making sure we're doing the right things in the right way. Besides any scientist who is simply doing this [research] to feather their own nests will fail - I don't work with anyone who doesn't have the patient first and foremost as their motivation."

Asked about his favourite personal achievement, Dr Burgess reluctantly shirks - " I guess the thing I am particularly proud of is understanding of the right dose for the right patients - how best to utilise a drug dosing schedule. Establishing the principles behind how we look at the drug, how we view patients, and how we view disease characteristics. Brin g ing all three factors together then helps us to develop something of greater value and allows us to make an early decision on the development of a drug. This concept of 'quick kill' ie we can kill the molecules early if we don't feel are going to add benefit lets us control the costs of development and more importantly to reduce the number of patients who are exposed to medicines that are of little benefit. If we get that single thing right I will be proud."

So I leave our conversation feeling inspired that there are good guys out there battling away, looking for new molecules, setting up trials to bring through treatments for the 1 in 3 of us who will get cancer. And as I call Mike's secretary - Philomena - to thank her for finding time in his crazy schedule she sighs happily and says "that's ok... he is busy but he always makes the time... he makes me proud to work in the pharmaceutical industry.". Wise words about a wise gentleman.