If you could research anything...?!

[peanutbutter45654]

Hi everyone! I am a current first-year MD/PhD student. I go to a T20 school with pretty diverse & extensive research opportunities. My research background is pretty diverse, and I find lots of areas interesting. My question is, what area of research do you think is going to explode within the next 10-20 years? What type of project/department should I get involved with during my PhD so that I will be most successful in say 20 years? Stem cells? Immunotherapy for cancer? Gut microbiome research? What are some of your ideas? What research topic will keep booming for many years to come? I'm open to anything at this point because I find almost everything fascinating! Thanks!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[GoSpursGo]

All of the topics you have highlighted are very exciting, and all of them are likely to explode (if they haven't already). You are going to find yourself in some very competitive company regardless. Doesn't mean you shouldn't do them, it just means the opportunity to get in on the ground floor has already left the station. In order to ACTUALLY get in on the ground floor you need to take a major leap of faith on an exploratory project and trust that you'll land on your feet even if the line of research winds up being a dead-end.

This is why the concept of research rotations exists. Try a few different things out, figure out what you're passionate about and, most importantly, which style of mentor you learn from best. To me the mentor-mentee fit is more important than the actual project. So if you truly are interested in a variety of topics I would stay open for as long as possible.

But, the correct answer to your question is that cancer immunotherapy is in fact the most interesting field Source: I am a pediatric oncologist studying immunotherapy.

 

[PathNeuroIMorFM]

My question is, what area of research do you think is going to explode within the next 10-20 years?

Probably AI is going to be cool until we find something else in 5-10 years. mRNA vaccines/technology as well. No one really talks about CAR-T cell therapy as much as they used to, but that's still pretty badass. Lots of applications there.

What type of project/department should I get involved with during my PhD so that I will be most successful in say 20 years?

Take it from someone who did a research year, here's the priority list from most to least important:

1) Pick a topic that YOU want to do.
2) Find a PI that you like and will vibe with.
2) Work with a PI on a project that is realistic and productive.

Some might argue productivity is more important than interest, but you will be far more productive and not hate your life if you work on something you actually enjoy. It does not need to be in your future specialty, even if you want to do something competitive. Choose something because YOU think it's cool, not because other people do. Whatever is cool today will be outdated by the time you graduate, so don't sweat it.

I personally found a lot of joy in doing a half clinical/half bench work project.
The clinical stuff kept me productive with rapid fire posters/abstracts + grounded in patient care.
The bench work kept me grounded on the really cool things that PDs will probably be more impressed with, with a slower burn of manuscripts. No posters/abstracts.

If you get bad vibes from a PI/Project when talking with them, trust your gut and find someone else.

 

[JoaoMoutinho]

This is why the concept of research rotations exists. Try a few different things out, figure out what you're passionate about and, most importantly, which style of mentor you learn from best. To me the mentor-mentee fit is more important than the actual project. So if you truly are interested in a variety of topics I would stay open for as long as possible.

QFT.

@peanutbutter45654 Pick the PI, not the project. You likely will not be doing your PhD research for the rest of your career. What really matters is that you learn to think like a scientist. Techniques come and go, and different research topics fall in and out of fashion. Being able to identify fundamental knowledge gaps and address them is what you really need to learn.

So look for a mentor that will give you the resources you need to succeed and who will teach you to think scientifically.

My thesis project is not at all related to what I was interested in when I started medical school. The techniques I use are completely different. I wouldn't change a single thing because 1) I was fortunate enough to land in the absolute best lab in the world (for me) with 2) a mentor who 100% has my back and is doing their best to train me, and 3) my project has turned out to be dope AF even if it didn't seem that way initially.

PS– you may get better advice in the physician scientist sub forum. Several of the best people who post over there don't seem to frequent this neck of the woods.

 

[peanutbutter45654]

All of the topics you have highlighted are very exciting, and all of them are likely to explode (if they haven't already). You are going to find yourself in some very competitive company regardless. Doesn't mean you shouldn't do them, it just means the opportunity to get in on the ground floor has already left the station. In order to ACTUALLY get in on the ground floor you need to take a major leap of faith on an exploratory project and trust that you'll land on your feet even if the line of research winds up being a dead-end.

This is why the concept of research rotations exists. Try a few different things out, figure out what you're passionate about and, most importantly, which style of mentor you learn from best. To me the mentor-mentee fit is more important than the actual project. So if you truly are interested in a variety of topics I would stay open for as long as possible.

But, the correct answer to your question is that cancer immunotherapy is in fact the most interesting field Source: I am a pediatric oncologist studying immunotherapy.Thanks for your thoughts

All of the topics you have highlighted are very exciting, and all of them are likely to explode (if they haven't already). You are going to find yourself in some very competitive company regardless. Doesn't mean you shouldn't do them, it just means the opportunity to get in on the ground floor has already left the station. In order to ACTUALLY get in on the ground floor you need to take a major leap of faith on an exploratory project and trust that you'll land on your feet even if the line of research winds up being a dead-end.

This is why the concept of research rotations exists. Try a few different things out, figure out what you're passionate about and, most importantly, which style of mentor you learn from best. To me the mentor-mentee fit is more important than the actual project. So if you truly are interested in a variety of topics I would stay open for as long as possible.

But, the correct answer to your question is that cancer immunotherapy is in fact the most interesting field Source: I am a pediatric oncologist studying immunotherapy.

Thanks for your thoughts! Do you think immunotherapy will still be relevant in 15 years from now? I honestly don't know too much about emerging treatments for cancer. What other types of treatment are on the horizon?

 

[peanutbutter45654]

QFT.

@peanutbutter45654 Pick the PI, not the project. You likely will not be doing your PhD research for the rest of your career. What really matters is that you learn to think like a scientist. Techniques come and go, and different research topics fall in and out of fashion. Being able to identify fundamental knowledge gaps and address them is what you really need to learn.

So look for a mentor that will give you the resources you need to succeed and who will teach you to think scientifically.

My thesis project is not at all related to what I was interested in when I started medical school. The techniques I use are completely different. I wouldn't change a single thing because 1) I was fortunate enough to land in the absolute best lab in the world (for me) with 2) a mentor who 100% has my back and is doing their best to train me, and 3) my project has turned out to be dope AF even if it didn't seem that way initially.

PS– you may get better advice in the physician scientist sub forum. Several of the best people who post over there don't seem to frequent this neck of the woods.

Let's pretend all the PIs are equally great? Then what field/research topic do you think will be exploding in 15 years?

 

[GoSpursGo]

Thanks for your thoughts! Do you think immunotherapy will still be relevant in 15 years from now? I honestly don't know too much about emerging treatments for cancer. What other types of treatment are on the horizon?

Yes.

Let's pretend all the PIs are equally great? Then what field/research topic do you think will be exploding in 15 years?

Even if they are equally great, they won’t be equally great FOR YOU. As mentioned above, things will come and go, other groups will scoop your research. Building a research career truly is about going about the process correctly, not about picking the right project

If I knew what would be exploding in 15 years, I would be writing grants on it 🙂

 

[SweetBurger]

my 2 cents, molecular imaging is pretty freaking cool, furthermore cancer metabolism is also really cool and finding ways to exploit it

 

[deleted1065184]

Stem cells? Immunotherapy for cancer? Gut microbiome research?

All of these areas will continue to explode, and also vaccine research with the introduction of mRNA vaccines. You could choose any of these fields or several others and do well. The bigger question is...how do you want to approach the research within these fields? Wet lab will always be relevant, but we are rapidly shifting to a world in which you have to have at least *some* bioinformatics/computational experience.

I would recommend choosing a lab that allows you to do *both* wet lab and dry lab work. And if you can, see if you can work with organoids for your wet lab work. I'm sure your school will have some labs doing that work. Not a requirement ofc, but I do suspect that will become the go-to in vivo models in the future.

The PhD is the chance for you to learn how to become an independent scientist and stack as many tools in your scientific arsenal as possible. Accordingly, the variety of skills you learn is actually quite a bit more important than the specific research you do. You need a project interesting enough so that you're not miserable, but PI match/lab environment + opportunity to learn new techniques is the most important decision to make when choosing your thesis lab.

When you go off to your PSTP or research-track residency, the most valuable thing you can bring to your postdoc lab will be a wide array of technical skills ranging from in vivo work (mouse, organoids, etc) to dry lab work. That will also help you find a niche if/when you start your own lab.

 

[Cornfed101]

You are going to get a lot of different opinions because we all have different interests. I’m working on a project now using VR and local anesthesia for pediatric anesthesia cases that normally required sedation or general. I think it’s super interesting but others might find it dull.

Find something that you can be passionate about and you'll have a better time

 

[JoaoMoutinho]

Let's pretend all the PIs are equally great? Then what field/research topic do you think will be exploding in 15 years?

Yes.

Even if they are equally great, they won’t be equally great FOR YOU. As mentioned above, things will come and go, other groups will scoop your research. Building a research career truly is about going about the process correctly, not about picking the right project

If I knew what would be exploding in 15 years, I would be writing grants on it

What (s)he said.

/Thread

 

[peanutbutter45654]

All of these areas will continue to explode, and also vaccine research with the introduction of mRNA vaccines. You could choose any of these fields or several others and do well. The bigger question is...how do you want to approach the research within these fields? Wet lab will always be relevant, but we are rapidly shifting to a world in which you have to have at least *some* bioinformatics/computational experience.

I would recommend choosing a lab that allows you to do *both* wet lab and dry lab work. And if you can, see if you can work with organoids for your wet lab work. I'm sure your school will have some labs doing that work. Not a requirement ofc, but I do suspect that will become the go-to in vivo models in the future.

The PhD is the chance for you to learn how to become an independent scientist and stack as many tools in your scientific arsenal as possible. Accordingly, the variety of skills you learn is actually quite a bit more important than the specific research you do. You need a project interesting enough so that you're not miserable, but PI match/lab environment + opportunity to learn new techniques is the most important decision to make when choosing your thesis lab.

When you go off to your PSTP or research-track residency, the most valuable thing you can bring to your postdoc lab will be a wide array of technical skills ranging from in vivo work (mouse, organoids, etc) to dry lab work. That will also help you find a niche if/when you start your own lab.

What are your thoughts on entering a lab working on brain organoid stuff? Will this be relevant in the future do you think?

 

[deleted1065184]

What are your thoughts on entering a lab working on brain organoid stuff? Will this be relevant in the future do you think?

Can't say with certainty, but I definitely think so.