Understanding Car-T Cell Therapy And Improving Laboratory Leadership With Dr. Michael Hudecek
Through the power of engineered cell therapy, we have the potential to revolutionize cancer treatment and bring hope to millions of patients worldwide. But true success lies not only in the science but also in the leadership that guides it. In this episode, we have the pleasure of having Dr. Michael Hudecek, a distinguished researcher and academic coordinator of the T2Evolve project. Michael has been instrumental in spearheading the development of CAR-T cell therapy, one of the most promising treatments for cancer patients. Our conversation with Michael delves into his research, discussing the latest advancements and discoveries in the field of CAR-T therapy. But that's not all. Dr. Hudecek also shares his insights on what it takes to be an effective leader of a lab group and how to lead a successful team with the right skills. Join us as we explore the world of engineered cell therapy and gain valuable insights from one of the leading researchers in Europe.
—
Listen to the podcast here
Understanding Car-T Cell Therapy And Improving Laboratory Leadership With Dr. Michael Hudecek
In this episode, we have the opportunity to have a dialogue with what in my mind, exemplifies someone who is developing or is a translational science leader and that is Dr. Michael Hudecek. He performed his medical training at the University of Leipzig in Germany. In his thesis, he analyzed the role of minor histocompatibility antigens during the graft versus host leukemia response after allogeneic stem cell transportation.
That begins with the trajectory for his career course, as you'll see. He was then recruited to the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center in Seattle, Washington in 2007 to perform a post-doctoral fellowship in the laboratory of Stanley R. Riddell in Seattle. Michael focused on the rational design of chimeric antigen receptors or CARs defining the optimal cellular competition of CAR T-cell products. If you follow some of the more recent developments in medicine, CAR T-cells are an out topic. Engineered cell therapy has been called the third and future pillar of medicine.
Since 2012, Michael is leading the translational CAR-T research program at the Department of Medicine at the Universitätsklinikum in Würzburg, Germany. He has been appointed as Associate Professor in Cellular Immunotherapy in 2020 and as Full Professor in Cellular Immunotherapy at the University of Würzburg in 2022. He has been a member of the Young Scholar Program and an extraordinary member of the Bavarian Academy of Sciences from 2015-2020. He was awarded the Artur Pappenheim Preis of the German Society for Hematology and Medical Oncology in 2017 and the Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von Schelling Award of the Bavarian Academy of Sciences in 2022.
Most importantly, he's the coordinator of Project T2EVOLVE, for which I've had the fortune to work with him for the past few years. We'll delve more into that but you'll see in this interview, Michael has followed a course of thinking in translational science and moving forward. Translational science is a bit different than translational research.
Translational science is beginning with basic biology and then thinking about how can we move that into the clinic. You'll see in the interview the challenges and his course across the whole spectrum from basic science to clinical mutation. One of the more important aspects that we get into and talk about is having a research lab culture, thinking about that and driving that culture to get the most out of the people that you work around. If you want to learn about that, as well as much as other things about what are some of the most exciting therapies, I'll sit back and read.
This is a great occasion. Welcome, Michael, to the show.
Thank you, Scott, for having me. It's a pleasure. I'm curious about what kind of questions you have for me and I am also looking forward to reading the blog that you're producing out of this.
At this stage, we're still at the very beginning. You're the fourth interview. We haven't launched yet. That'll be quite interesting as we develop but the ambition is to have a whole bunch of people doing this. What I'd like to start with is to get a sense of who you are. Is there something around you on your desk that you can describe for the audience? Something maybe unusual or a story behind it?
Looking around at my desk, there are all kinds of computer equipment and piles of papers and manuscripts that I'm supposed to review but the thing that would maybe stand out is a little collection of chestnuts that I've accumulated over the years. I performed postdoctoral training in the US in Seattle and I arrived here in late summer and early fall in Würzburg at the university. I noted that on the way to the cafeteria, there were a few chestnut trees and you collect the chestnuts that fall as I did when I was a kid. We made the little figures out of this.
I have a little collection here and they didn’t shrink. I have a few chestnuts from every year that I started and it's been a few years now that I've been in Würzburg. It's a nice collection and people probably always look at this because of this whole pile that is sitting next to my computer screen. It's a nice reminder because it's something physical. It's also natural. It's not DRL like the lab work that we do. It's not synthetic, like the immunity that we're trying to bring into immune cells to treat cancer. It's a very natural thing and I like that a lot.
It’s a nice aspect both reminding you of your childhood and also nature at the same time. You've been in Würzburg for a few years. I want to go back and ask you, what was the lowest point of your career? How did you get through it?
I'm developing a career as a translational researcher in medicine. I've done medical training. I went on to do post-doctoral research and I'm doing translational research and clinical trials still in the field of cancer immunotherapy in these ups and downs. Treating cancer is a formidable challenge. One anecdote or episode in my career that I remember and that I want to share with you, I wouldn't say that it was the lowest in terms of negative.
Car T Cell Therapy: Treating cancer is a formidable challenge.
It was challenging but it was important to get through a point right at the end of my post-doctoral training and then transition into becoming an independent researcher here in Germany. We had a quite high-profile paper in review at a wonderful journal and it was supposed to be the perfect start right for my return to Europe. We get the reviewer's questions. We work through all of them. Almost all questions were answered and then we do one experiment that seemed to be trivial and that we performed.
The outcome of that experiment turned our entire hypothesis around. It turned out that the entire manuscript had the wrong interpretation of the results and in the end, it didn't get published. That was a difficult situation because I was right at that point returning to Europe. I was about to apply for funding to build my lab. Without the papers, it's hard to get funding. It was a disappointment mainly because that paper didn't come through and I was worried about how things would go forward but it turned out that it was also important to learn that it is possible to get through this.
That there is support from scientific colleagues and friends to work on refining our initial hypothesis and finding a solution. It still was published in the paper but not as high as thought but still, coming up with a solution that still is helping patients. As I can tell you, this story was around optimizing the design of these synthetic immune receptors, CARs that we used to treat cancer. Learning that our initial hypothesis was wrong but that we still found a solution and an answer to the question that we had asked.
This has also led to embodiments of CAR T-cell therapy that we see as commercial products and that have helped several hundreds of patients to have an effective cancer treatment that is accessible to patients in many countries as a treatment for lymph node cancer. It was a difficult situation because it's this typical situation you're in. We have to publish and deliver results. Sometimes, you also see that hypotheses and the interpretation of results also change with time.
Maybe don't consider things because you didn't know they exist and you then come to new conclusions. That was interesting learning and it has made me stronger in a sense that I also accept. This is part of the lab culture that I'm trying to live here in that if there are challenges, we have to accept what they are and we have to find solutions. There's no way of closing your eyes and saying, “This is maybe not important.” If you don't cure cancer, also your preclinical model tells you that you need to become better and find a better solution. This is a main driver also of the research that we do. It is hopefully one reason that will help us also survive as a research lab in the future.
It's a great story of resilience because you kept the faith. You kept moving and stayed with science. You mentioned colleagues. Was there a particular colleague that was helpful?
When I started my lab, one of the concerns that I had is that one day I would run out of ideas and things to do research on. I was worried I would run dry and have no fresh ideas. That point has luckily never happened. There are always new ideas and avenues to pursue but I also found that amongst a selected number of colleagues was picking up the phone and having a discussion over the phone or by Zoom. There are so many things that we discover and we say, “Have you read that paper? What do you think about that? Shouldn't we try this and this?”
I always find it very inspiring and helpful to talk with colleagues. Not just any colleague but there are 1 or 2 handfuls of colleagues that I know also very well. There's a lot of trust and these discussions always bring so many new ideas and avenues for investigation. I always find that very inspiring and also helpful because if you have a maybe dry month or a little try episode where some things in the lab don't go so well, this is important to cheer you up and to help you remain optimistic and keep going.
I've heard in some of the other interviews that reaching out and talking to people is extremely valuable even though you don't even know exactly what's going to come out of it. We'll flip and go to what excites you the most about what you're doing.
I'm very excited about the research that we do because I see the opportunity to bring innovative novel treatments to cancer patients. It's this translational aspect. We develop a concept in the lab and refine it to the point where we think it's appropriate to also evaluate this in the context of a clinical trial on humans. We see the clinical signal and also do correlative research to take it back and make it even better in the next iteration cycle. That interface between the lab and the patient's bedside, this translational research aspect I feel is very gratifying and is the motivation for what we do.
Car T Cell Therapy: Research now has this big opportunity to bring innovative, novel treatments to cancer patients. It's this translational aspect.
Maybe take a moment to explain a bit about your field of research and what you are doing because not everybody reading will know so easily.
We’re in the field of cancer immunotherapy. We know that the immune system is able to recognize malignant cells and eliminate them. The task is to also break tolerance for target cells that originate from the patient's own, from the body's own but is now malignant and use genetic engineering to induce synthetic immunity.
We create new immune receptors in the lab that have specificity for target antigens that would normally not be recognized by the immune system so we can redirect the immune system to recognize and eliminate malignant cells. That's a form of cancer immunotherapy that can be very potent clinically and that is able to cure advanced cancers where other treatments have failed.
That's very exciting and I know we've worked together on some projects in that regard. What kind of patients are these? Are these therapies something that's 1st line or are they 2nd, 3rd or 4th line?
This field of cellular immunotherapy is still relatively young. This field has matured to a point where some of these engineered immune cells, we call them CAR T-cells are also approved and available in routine clinical practice. They are still used after conventional autotherapies have failed like chemotherapy or antibody-based immunotherapy. It’s not usually the first line where this is administered but because we see that these treatments are quite effective and have a specific spectrum of side effects, which is still distinct from chemotherapy and radiotherapy.
There's also a strong interest from patients to bring these treatments into earlier lines of therapy because when we use a patient's immune cells, we want these immune cells to be as fit as possible. We don't want them to be exposed to prior chemotherapy, for example. There's a strong momentum to bring these treatments into first-line treatments but in new indications like solid organ tumors, as always, new and experimental treatments are evaluated once the established treatments have failed. It's typically that you work your way from later lines of therapies to early lines of therapies and this is what's going on going on in the field.
In a way, it's the last hope sometimes for these patients.
Ideally, you're going from a last-resort treatment to the first-line standard of care. This would be the ideal way how you develop a therapy and this takes years to do.
What's interesting about the engineered cell therapy field is that the laboratory science seems to be very closely coupled to the actual taking it into the clinic compared to a lot of diseases. Am I correct in that perception? Do you find that as well? What I meant is that you're working in the lab, you create this new modification to a line of cells and you're very quickly implementing that into clinical studies. Is that the right way to think about it?
This is the ideal way to think about it. Typically, what happens is that we create or generate several product candidates where we say, “Here is the whole product and it has this quality. Here's the modification of this and it has this quality. Maybe in your laboratory models, this works better. It is thought that the effort and expense of doing clinical research and clinical trials are such that you can only select very few of these iterations to be tested and evaluated.
In part, your statement is true. Yes, we are bringing some of these innovations to the clinic rapidly. The key though is from the many iterations that you can generate in the laboratory because there is more flexibility and the research is not as expensive as doing clinical research, you then have to select certain iterations in product candidates to go to a clinical trial. This selection process is the most difficult part because you have to select some biomarkers or benchmarks to determine if this is the one that they're going to take forward.
It is sometimes hard to know if this decision is right because it is sometimes not possible to test the other iterations that you've made in the clinic. You only have that one clinical signal. This is the bottleneck that we often discuss in our projects in clinical translations. There are more variants that you make in the research lab that you can test clinically. This decision process is, “Which product am I going to take forward to the clinic? Was this in the end the best choice?” Sometimes, it's the curse but also the art of translational research.
Car T Cell Therapy: In the laboratory, it’s sometimes hard to know if a decision is right. It’s sometimes not possible to test the other iterations you’ve made in the clinic.
How do you make those decisions?
We're trying to make those decisions as informed as possible because we have developed these engineered immune cell therapies, CAR T-cells for more than a decade. Several of them are in the clinic so we have a clinical signal for some of them. We take those back to the lab and use them as benchmarks and say, “Here's a standardized model.” We have a cell product that we have tested clinically and we know how it works. We can make a comparison in the laboratory model and see if our alternative or improved model is better. This has some predictive value and gives you some confidence that you will then also see a positive clinical signal with the alternative and novel product.
Who decides? Is it the team? Is it you and the people in the lab?
Often you will find yourself that you then have to make the decision on your own because you can create an advisory board. You can discuss it with colleagues in the field. You can discuss it with the lab. Still some decisions, in the end, are more about instinct or it's the instinct of the translational researchers. At least, I find myself often and I guess the same is true for other leading investigators in the field. In the end, people look at you and say, “What shall we do now?”
It's not necessarily your call alone. There are many layers at which you then also make assessments and analyses. However, the truth also is many things we don't know and we don't have data to support a decision. It's more about many years of experience and finding parallels to previous development programs that you had. In the end, it’s also determining which model has given us information that we think is predictive of what will happen in the clinic and which models provide interesting data but are not necessarily relevant for the clinical translation.
Maybe it's your subconscious experience integrating it in the back of your mind making that. You've mentioned the culture of your lab. Do you think about the culture of the group that you're leading?
I do think about lab culture a lot because it's important in this research. It attracts also a certain type of personality. Also, a type of personality sometimes is quite particular but sometimes, these particular people are also the most creative ones. However, we have to also keep to a certain lab routine and observe certain rules.
We have to perform experiments in a standardized way so we can draw meaningful conclusions from them. It's always a mix of creativity but also discipline and rigor. If you put all this together, it creates an interesting mix. Creativity is important and this is also important in a lab culture in particular at Universities or in a lab team where there is still some form of hierarchy.
This lab organization and hierarchy still need to be such that we don't kill off the creativity because this is the most important thing which helps us also survive as a research lab. Only those labs that survive long term that have the best ideas are able to efficiently execute them and also publish them. This is part of the paradigm in science.
Do you have a sense of what you do as a leader to subvert that hierarchy or avoid that?
I meet with people regularly. Communication is important. Also, I try to lead people in a way where they can be creative. They feel comfortable talking about their observations in the lab and their data. They feel comfortable talking about the ideas but also then help them structure their ideas in a way that can lead to experiments that can help you address these questions.
In the end, it's also to some extent leading by example. In this global research world, it's also about being fast and able to perceive these new concepts and ideas. Rapidly being able to transform them into experiments that give you answers to the questions that you've put out. We have a lot of speed that is of the essence also and that requires hard work. Also, it requires leading by example by the lab leader.
Car T Cell Therapy: In this global research world, it's about being fast and being able to perceive new concepts and ideas.
It's very interesting that you highlight creativity. What you’re talking about is making it safe to bring up creative ideas. That's the same thing with the dialogue as well. People feel safe and they feel, “I can bring that idea out.” You probably also increased that safety by what you said is helping them to shape it into something that can be tested forward. Instead of saying, “It's this guidance.”
What I often see is that people then come up with experiments that are hard to complex. I often try to trim it down to relatively simple experiments. We narrow it down to one variable and quite feasible experiments where we then go in small but very systematic steps. Typically, those experiments where we're trying to make 5 or 10 steps at the same time fail because the handling is too difficult and mistakes happen or the data are not conclusive.
Typically, I find myself telling people rather than doing one enormous experiment, why don't you do 2 or 3 smaller experiments because of the smaller size, you can execute them meticulously. Also, the insight that you learn in experiment 1 will help you shape and focus experiments 2, 3 and 4. In the end, this is helpful.
I am going to ask again. Do you think we're lacking leaders in sciences in healthcare?
No, I don't think so. It's about discovering potential leaders and helping them mature and nurture these leaders. It’s supporting creative thinking but also stamina. Creativity is important but it also needs stamina to then have the endurance to blend this creativity into something meaningful. If you're hopping from one brilliant idea every day to the other but never get anything done, the output is zero or the benefit for society is zero. The discovery and nurturing of leaders are also about providing an environment where these people can mature but also helping them acquire all the skills and tools that are necessary to also move forward.
It's that resilience again.
It's resilience. With the current generation in the lab, stamina thing is important. The current generation of young investigators in the lab has a short attention span. How long is a Twitter message? How long is the clip on YouTube? It's about this perseverance. We need to plan this strategically. It will mean experiments over a few months until we get there. This is the scientific story that is going to come out of this after 2 or 3 years. Stamina is important and that is maybe an important skill, particularly for the current generation.
Stamina is an important skill, particularly for the current generation.
How does one become a leader?
Are you implying that I'm a leader?
It’s clear to me.
I'm just doing my job. It's an instinct. It's a thing about doing what you want to do and what you think is right. I often found myself also in a position where also other colleagues from the field came to me and said, “Here's an opportunity for a network grant but then who's going to lead it?” I said, “If you all participate, I feel comfortable leading in and bringing it to fruition with you.” I have the willingness to also suffer.
It also means the ability to suffer because it is typically a lot of work. It's many working hours and a lot of effort but it's typically worth it. That's what my feeling is and what I receive as gratitude when I see that project comes to fruition and people work together productively. It's to a good part, intrinsic, if you become a leader and if you have that inherent willingness to lead.
Leadership means having the ability to suffer because it typically involves a lot of work.
It's courage, in a way.
It is true. That's an excellent virtue, Scott.
I'd like to also mention gratitude and that means that you'd like to see these projects come to fruition.
In some of the projects we have, I see that positive energy and creativity are happening and we are moving forward. This is an enormous amount of gratitude that I feel when I see that unfold and that makes me happy. I'm also happy for my colleagues. It's not like I have to be involved in every part of a network project is happening but if we see that together and we move forward, I feel a lot of gratitude. To the point of courage, sometimes when PhD students have their defense and/or Master students, I tell them, “Mut,” which when German means courage.
You mentioned these network projects. What are the most important ones you're working on?
These network projects have allowed us to accomplish things that by ourselves would've been much more difficult. One example is the CARAMBA EU Project in the Horizon 2020 Program which has allowed us to do clinical trials. It's this network of different expertise in preclinical and clinical research but also, GMP manufacturing, patient advocates and project management that has made that success possible in a relatively short amount of time. I'm very grateful for this.
We have the T2EVOLVE and my project and they're also a little more abstract. They're a little more strategic still. It's also about developing more overarching concepts and models. There's also an aspect of policymaking and regulation. There's a good amount of hands-on experiments that we're doing. This is extremely valuable and has a very broad scope.
Something very fancy is the AIDPATH project uses artificial intelligence. Everyone's talking about artificial intelligence. I'm not sure we know what artificial intelligence is and if that exists. At least, what we perceive or feel every day is that we don't have enough data to feed and create an AI algorithm. We first need to start creating concepts and trying to become clear where can AI help and how we get the databases to develop and feed these algorithms. This is very inspirational and this is why I like it.
It also highlights that opportunities come along and be willing to say yes when they come along. I was wondering, in life sciences and healthcare innovation and research, there are always tons of opportunities within these projects as well. You're a great example of that's how you became a leader, essentially. What's something that you do when nobody else is watching that enhances your performance as a leader? We've talked about a lot of different things but what's something you do behind the scenes?
I'm a runner. I go running. I know that a 30 or 40-minute run will clear my mind. Typically, when we're late on writing a grant and the deadline is coming and there are tons of things floating around and the Zoom conferences with ideas and now it needs to be structured and put on paper, it helps when I go running. It flows out and the text is there. That is always amazing to me.
It comes back to the chestnut thing. It's something very physical. It's very quiet. I like to run through a forest or something. I don't run with headphones and music. I'm okay with just myself and my running. It helps. It's also about a deep breath. Sometimes ahead of big meetings, big talks and presentations, it helps to have a minute of silence if you lock yourself in the bathroom and take a moment to breathe and not have anyone around you. It is an important moment also to focus. Also, just say, “Courage.” Go out there and deliver a good show because that's what often it is.
Sometimes, ahead of big meetings, big talks, and presentations, it helps to have a minute of silence. Have courage, go out there and deliver a good show because that's what it often is.
What I've read about neurologically what you're doing is you're engaging the default mode network. You're turning off what some people call the hare brain. You are turning on the tortoise model and that's the subconscious helping to solve the problems. That's a great one. What do you read? Do you read journals or books?
I don't read enough. I should read more. When you look at the calendar, it's full of meetings, obligations and writing something here and there. Reading is important to know what is happening in the field and scientific papers. Once in a while, I enjoy reading a non-scientific book, even though with two kids, this is not a pleasure I have very often but I should get to more often again. It's nice to read a book. If it's a short crime story or something, which is a different world, I can rapidly immerse myself into that world if the book is well written.
I enjoy being in a different universe for 30 minutes or 1 hour and not thinking about milestones, development plans and grant deadlines. I enjoy that a lot. It's also nice to then see that there's also something outside the science world. That's important to realize. What we do is probably important. We do it with all enthusiasm and dedication but there's also something else. It helps you to stay grounded and that's also important to stay optimistic.
What advice would you give a younger version of yourself?
Looking back, I've been very fortunate. In terms of my professional career, I've been able to do many things that in retrospect were helpful. Not too many garden paths I went down and maybe I would tell myself, “Relax and don't worry too much. It will work out,” but maybe it's exactly that worry that keeps you running and keeps you running fast. Especially when you're young, it is also important to move forward. I'll probably tell my younger self to not worry too much and enjoy a little more but you don't know if that would've been enough to become a leader, if you call me a leader, Scott.
Relax and don't worry too much. Enjoy a little more. It will work out.
Perhaps that advice is what you've followed in a way to being able to say yes and have the courage to say yes when the opportunities arrive.
That is an important thing. Sometimes, I find myself, I wouldn't say scared. If you say yes to that, “Why did you say yes?” This is going to be a difficult task but it's exactly that. In retrospect, it was good and necessary.
When you think about a lot of the productivity leaders that should say no, perhaps it’s a counterpoint-of-view to that.
When I become older, it's important to also say sometimes no because the opportunities come more and more and there are so many things that also people want from you. They ask you if you can do this and that or they tell you, “You have to do this and that.” It's becoming more important to also then say, no and say, “This is too much,” and/or work with a team and say, “How can we handle this as a team,” and then delegate work. That's an important aspect.
We're coming to the end. I want to give you the opportunity if you want to mention or bring out or highlight.
I'm curious. What have you heard from other people that you've invited and that you consider leaders? What is their credo? What is their motivation?
It's still very early days. This is the fourth one. I'm still trying to consolidate all the different angles but one thing or a theme that does come out is talking to people when things aren't going well. It’s an interesting thing because you think about science. Everyone loves to go to meetings and that's what you do at meetings, you talk to people. That's a revealing scientific structure and that also is about working with mentors as well. That comes across quite impressively. It's also about taking opportunities.
People who have been reading this will learn the very first one was a scientist who was his overall impact factor is 215 or H-Index. He's in the top ten in all fields. He didn't want to do research and stuff but he couldn't get clinical positions. Somebody said, “You should do research.” You have this completely but it's the same kind of thing that the passion for discovery and the interest and making things move forward is also common thing.
This series is going to be about senior people or at the end of their careers or people like you who are in the middle of their careers. It’s not only in academia but also the industry as well. As we consolidate this more, there is a bit more crossover and it's quite interesting.
I am looking forward to reading the outcome of the show that you put together. If any additional questions come up or we need to re-tape anything, I am always here.
One thing I always like to know is if people want to learn more about what you're doing, is there a Hudecek Lab webpage?
I am on the UKW.de website. It’s the website of the University Hospital of Würzburg. The lab has a homepage. It's constantly being remodeled, improved and updated. We're going through another revision cycle but if you punch in HudecekLab@UKW.de, you'll certainly be directed to it.
Thank you for being a guest. As we go forward, I'll probably have you come back at some point because there's probably more we could talk about.
It’s my pleasure.
Thanks and have a good day. I'm sure we'll be talking again soon.
Thank you, Scott, for having me. It's a pleasure to work with you. I am looking forward to seeing the outcome of the show.
Important Links
About Michael Hudecek
Michael Hudecek, MD performed medical training at the University of Leipzig, Germany. In his thesis, he analyzed the role of minor histocompatibility antigens during the graft-versus-leukemia response after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.
Michael was recruited to the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, WA in 2007 to perform a post-doctoral fellowship in the laboratory of Stanley R. Riddell. In Seattle, Michael focused on rationally designing chimeric antigen receptors (CARs) and defining optimal cellular compositions of CAR-T cell products. Since 2012, Michael is leading the Translational CAR-T Research Program in the Department of Medicine II at Universitätsklinikum Würzburg, Germany.
Michael has been appointed as Associate Professor in Cellular Immunotherapy in 2020, and as Full Professor in Cellular Immunotherapy at the University of Würzburg in 2022. He has been a Member of the Young Scholar Program and an Extraordinary Member of the Bavarian Academy of Sciences from 2015-2020, was awarded the Artur Pappenheim Preis of the German Society for Hematology and Medical Oncology in 2017 and the Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von Schelling Award of the Bavarian Academy of Sciences in 2022.
