T2 Research

[britishmafia]

---

Members don't see this ad.

A lot of people talk about T1 research, or "bench to the bedside." However, I am deeply fascinated with T2 research, or "bedside to the bench." Are there sources where I can read about how this would work? For example, what kind of research questions do these people typically ask? Does anyone plan to perform T2 research and, if so, what do you plan to do?

This a dense subject, I know. The NIH likes to focus more on "bench to the bedside" and that's where most research is focused nowadays anyway. I'm always fascinated with something new.

 

[GWD]

I'm not sure what T2 research is, because I've never heard that term before.

Does this count?

I work with mesenchymal stem cells (MSC). People have known they have some interesting properties for awhile: immunomodulatory, pro-angiogenic and regenerative, hemopoeitically stimulatory...

Based on this phenomena, MSC have been used as a putative therapy to treat a number of ailments. In fact, they are currently in clinical trials and drug development for several diseases. But nobody really knows how they work.

So that's what my thesis is about. Elucidating the molecular and cellular mechanisms by which they produce their biological activity.

Is that considered T2 research, since they are already being used in the clinic?

 

[Doctor&Geek]

I posted this yesterday:
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showpost.php?p=6872665&postcount=16

 

[Neuronix]

and here I was taking T1 and T2 to mean:

http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/299/2/211

"The distinction between these 2 definitions of translational research was articulated by the Institute of Medicine's Clinical Research Roundtable,5 which described 2 "translational blocks" in the clinical research enterprise and which some now label as T1 and T2. The first roadblock (T1) was described by the roundtable as "the transfer of new understandings of disease mechanisms gained in the laboratory into the development of new methods for diagnosis, therapy, and prevention and their first testing in humans." The roundtable described the second roadblock (T2) as "the translation of results from clinical studies into everyday clinical practice and health decision making."

That being said, I can also define them as longitudinal and transverse relaxation...

 

[StIGMA]

I have seen your definitions described elsewhere Neuronix, although I cannot find the article at the moment.

 

[britishmafia]

Ah so I guess I had my definitions wrong. Sorry, new at this.

Anyway, I suppose that T2 focuses more on public health?

My question then would revolve around the facets of analyzing problems at the bedside first and addressing those problems in the lab. Many tend to focus on the lab work first and develop a new treatment for patients second. Does this make sense?

Again, I will (hopefully...) be joining some MD/PhD program next year, and I'm sure the program will train me in the terminology or give me some exposure to it at this time. To tell you the truth, it's fairly abstruse for a newcomer.

 

[mercaptovizadeh]

Ah so I guess I had my definitions wrong. Sorry, new at this.

Anyway, I suppose that T2 focuses more on public health?

My question then would revolve around the facets of analyzing problems at the bedside first and addressing those problems in the lab. Many tend to focus on the lab work first and develop a new treatment for patients second. Does this make sense?

Again, I will (hopefully...) be joining some MD/PhD program next year, and I'm sure the program will train me in the terminology or give me some exposure to it at this time. To tell you the truth, it's fairly abstruse for a newcomer.

I don't understand the idea behind this concept. Shouldn't *all* biomedical research stem in some way from "the bedside" and have a view towards going back to the bench. One would think that it is precisely the so-called T2 research that has predominated (and still does) and that it is T1 that needs promoting.

Either way, the whole "translational" stuff is getting annoying to me. It seems like it's just another buzzword and I'm not convinced that all that many cures/treatments are being "translated" from the lab to the clinic.

 

[StIGMA]

Some of the dogma is that T1 dominates because there is no clear path from T1 to T2. For scientists, T2 is a roadblock, as they are not trained to tackle all of the complications of integrating a new treatment into a hospital, etc. It makes sense, seeing how much research is done versus how little change in health care occurs (take this with a grain of salt, I am not in an MD/PhD program yet!).

 

[MrMunkily]

I think that what you are referring to as T2 is better described as "Patient oriented research" by Brown & Goldstein in their paper from a few years ago:

"The Clinical Investigator: Bewitched, Bothered, and Bewildered—But Still Beloved"

It's basically the first step in understanding any disease. One must go to the clinic to understand the manifestations and pathophysiology and pathology of the disease, then try to deconstruct it in the lab.

As other have stated, T2 means something different.