Research Science Liaisons – We're Like MSLs, Only the Opposite

Research Science Liaisons – We’re like MSLs, Only the Opposite

When we first meet with Medical Science Liaisons (MSLs), they are often confused about our role. We can’t blame them – our position is unique and very few cancer centers have a role like ours. Our 30-second “pitch” to MSLs is always “We are like you, only the opposite”.

Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center (LCCC) at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, has always had a strong portfolio of investigator-initiated clinical trials. However, LCCC recognized a need to increase accruals across all disease groups and improve industry partnerships. The Research Science Liaison role was created for PhD-level professionals with the expertise to interface with industry partners, particularly through establishing relationships with MSLs, to scout innovative industry-sponsored trial opportunities. Two RSLs were brought on board, with their work broadly divided into solid tumor and hematologic oncology coverage.

Establishing the RSL role

During the first 6-12 months in our role, our priority was making connections with as many MSLs covering our region as possible. Initially, we leveraged existing relationships with MSLs that providers and the medical writing team already had through investigator-initiated trials via email and requested a short virtual meeting to explain our role. To establish new connections, we sometimes turned to LinkedIn for initial outreach, and other times submitted inquiries through company websites. LinkedIn messages were slightly more successful than website inquiries. One of our biggest challenges was convincing MSLs to meet with us, given their primary focus on engaging with Key Opinion Leaders (KOLs). We had to answer key questions:

How do you convince an MSL to meet with you instead of a KOL?
How do we demonstrate the benefit of meeting with an RSL?

By the end of 2023, we had met with 66 companies in 135 meetings. There was only one instance where a company declined to meet with us. We discovered key advantages to the RSL-MSL collaborations:

When an MSL met with an RSL first, they gained a broader understanding of LCCCs clinical trial portfolio, allowing the RSL to facilitate introductions to relevant KOLs.
MSLs benefited from a streamlined communication process, reducing the need for multiple emails and providing a single point of contact for all queries and connections. One MSL quoted the following after working with the RSLs, “Thank you both so much for doing that call so quickly. It helps those internal teams so much to have actual contact with sites. This was a perfect example of why we need someone in your position”.

Outreach and maintaining industry relationships

Our strongest relationships are the ones that we maintain with biannual or quarterly meetings. The conversations during these check-ins serve two purposes. First, we provide general updates about what kinds of trials our disease groups are in need of, and what new providers have joined Lineberger. Second, we like to touch base on what trials we have in activation, and whether there are any inefficiencies we need to course correct. For instance, if a CRO is being particularly slow to respond to our activation team’s requests, it can be helpful to have the MSL check in from their end.

Our work is largely remote, and we’ve found that most PIs prefer to meet with MSLs virtually. That being said, we occasionally have sufficient interest in a company’s pipeline to justify an on-site event for MSLs and providers to meet in person and review a company’s pipeline. These can also be arranged virtually.

Like MSLs, we attend large oncology meetings, such as ASCO and ASH, both to stay abreast of the newest trial results and to take advantage of having so many of our contacts in the same location. National conferences are a great place to pop into company booths for face time with MSLs we have already been working with, or introduce ourselves to potential new contacts. Prior to the conference, we remind the providers we work with that we will be attending and offer to attend any meetings with industry representatives in their place, if they are not able to travel to that meeting. We also compile a list of abstracts/presentations by our investigators and send them to MSLs in advance in case they want to attend a session. Our first conference attendance was ASCO in 2023. At ASCO 2023, when our role was still developing and we were focused on building relationships, we identified 19 contacts that ultimately led to further meetings. For ASH 2023, we attended 9 clinical trial discussion meetings, which led to 4 industry-sponsored clinical trials undergoing activation at Lineberger. Going into ASCO 2024, we had 9 companies request to schedule meetings with us to catch up with solid tumor-focused MSLs we already knew, to review pipelines, specific trials, or portfolio needs.

Supporting Clinical Trials Internally

Pod “Portfolio Meetings” are held monthly or on an ad hoc basis according to each disease group’s preference. The purpose of portfolio meetings is to review studies under consideration, update teams on study progress from initial communication through site selection, and discuss present or emerging gaps in the portfolio where a patient population may benefit from a study. This can also be a time to review trends in enrollment and whether a particular eligibility requirement or element of a study has been hampering accrual.

One of our roles is to shepherd ISTs through the initial steps leading up to site selection. The tasks of submitting CDAs to the legal team, completing feasibility questionnaires, and scheduling site qualification visits rely heavily on email communications that can be overlooked without a designated individual tracking their steps. In addition, by centralizing these processes, we maintain consistency in the answers provided and somewhat standardize what our site agrees to (e.g. virtual vs. in-person site visits, time granted with a potential PI and study team to discuss a study). The RSL also serves as a primary point of contact if an MSL or industry representative needs to discuss a study internally with the UNC team but does not know the right connection. Through our role, we are able to expedite partnerships and improve efficiency. Dr. Sascha Tuchman, Professor of Medicine and the Clinic Medical Director for Malignant Hematology, said the following about the RSL position, “Your liaising between us and pharma has been truly invaluable in moving things forward. What was previously a haphazard, fairly inefficient process of PI’s communicating with pharma about collaborations is now much more organized and effective under your leadership.”

Measuring Impact: Qualitative and Quantitative Accomplishments

Given our collective backgrounds in science, we feel obligated to justify our roles empirically. Have we contributed to an increase in the number of industry-sponsored trials that Lineberger has opened? Are accruals to industry-sponsored trials on the rise? Not surprisingly, quantifying our impact across the cancer center is difficult due to the inherent noisiness of the data. In addition, most of the data for the timelines we now have control over (for example, time to return a feasibility questionnaire to a sponsor or CRO) was not collected prior to our role being created. Other data points (number of opened trials, number of enrollments to trials we identified) require long-term monitoring before trends are apparent. Moreover, the RSL position was established in 2023, when cancer centers were still recovering from COVID shutdowns and the Great Resignation. However, at this time, we can offer anecdotal evidence that we have had a positive impact on study selection and accrual:

In the spring of 2024, a study was posted on clinicaltrials.gov for a patient population that was in need of a trial. The POD leader was interested in learning more, and upon reaching out to the sponsor, we learned that there was a spot for one additional site. Within just 20 calendar days of identifying the study, we were able to expedite a CDA, meet with the sponsor, complete feasibility, and receive a site selection letter.

The RSL role is truly making an impact at UNC LCCC. The most common feedback we receive from MSLs is, “I wish all sites had a role like yours.” The question now becomes: how many other Universities will follow suit?

About the authors:

Kate Ashcraft, PhD

Kate Ashcraft holds a PhD in Microbiology and Immunology and has authored/co-authored over 20 articles in the pre-clinical oncology space. Her interest in accelerating novel cancer therapies led her to pivot from the bench to clinical trials in 2018. Currently, she serves as the Research Science Liaison for solid tumors and Phase 1 trials at the UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, where she seeks out innovative trials that best suit the needs of these patient populations.

Kelsey Quinn, PhD

Kelsey has a PhD in Animal Science and Molecular Cell Biology and has authored or co-authored over 15 publications focused on chemokine and cytokine signaling. Driven by a passion for supporting pharmaceutical and biotech companies—and inspired by her father’s battle with cancer, she transitioned into oncology clinical research. She currently serves as the Research Science Liaison for Hematology and Cellular Therapeutic trials at the UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center.