Advances in translational science require innovative solutions, and engagement of productive transdisciplinary teams play a critical role. While various forms of scientific meetings have long provided venues for sharing scientific findings and generating new collaborations, many conferences lack opportunities for active discussions. We describe the use of an Un-Meeting to foster innovative translational science teams through engaged discussions across multidisciplinary groups addressing a shared theme. The Un-Meeting was delivered by the University of Rochester Center for Leading Innovation and Collaboration, the national coordinating center for the National Institutes of Health Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) program. This pilot CTSA program Un-Meeting focused on engaging translational scientists, policy-makers, community members, advocates, and public health professionals to address the opioid crisis. The participant-driven format leveraged lightning talks, attendee-led idea generation, and extensive breakout discussions to foster multidisciplinary networking. Results indicated participation by a broad set of attendees and a high level of networking during the meeting. These results, coupled with the growth of the Un-Meeting across the CTSA Consortium, provide practices and models to potentially advance team and translational science. While future work will further assess the impact of Un-Meetings, this format presents a promising approach to enhance translational science.

Diversification of the Translational Science workforce is a strategic goal for the National Center for the Advancement of Translational Science (NCATS) program. NCATS has identified the development of translational science education, training, and support for a diverse translational science workforce as key to advancing the growing field of translational science. An annual mixed-methods assessment has been conducted on Common Metrics data submitted by over 60 Clinical & Translational Science Awards (CTSA) programs nationwide and includes metrics addressing recruitment and retention of scientists with particular attention to underrepresented persons and women. This article describes a methodology for the development of From Insights to Action, a resource for guiding program implementation and strategic planning to develop a diverse clinical and translational science workforce. This was informed by the Common Metrics Initiative process and constituted of findings from qualitative interviews of a subset of CTSAs that participated. The dissemination of this guide had several impacts, including providing structural foci for the CTSA Fall 2020 program meeting centered on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in translational science; addressing NCATS’ goal of workforce diversity; and understanding the number of diverse graduates still engaged in research.

Identifying and disseminating actionable intelligence is a challenging task that requires thoughtful planning. The National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences instituted the Common Metrics Initiative with the goal of evaluating the Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) Programs using a standard set of metrics. Initially managed by Tufts University, the Center for Leading Innovation and Collaboration (CLIC) at the University of Rochester began leading this initiative in 2017. In directing this work, CLIC created a framework for communicating and disseminating data insights. Insights to Inspire emerged from the need to share strategies and lessons learned to improve metric performance at the local level to a network of 60+ academic research institutions. Insights to Inspire employs a mixed methods approach for translating data into actionable intelligence. A series of blogs, webinars, and webcasts were designed to communicate metric-specific strategies used by individual sites to the broader CTSA consortium. A dissemination plan to expand the reach beyond metric stakeholders utilized focused communications including social media channels, network newsletters, and presentations at national meetings. This framework serves as a blueprint for other national evaluation programs interested in a systematic approach to using data insights for continuous improvement.

The 2020 COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound impact on the clinical research enterprises at the 60 Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) Hubs throughout the nation. There was simultaneously a need to expand research to obtain crucial data about disease prognosis and therapy and enormous limitations on conducting research as localities and institutions limited travel and person-to-person contact. These imperatives resulted in major changes in the way research was conducted, including expediting Institutional Review Board review, shifting to remote interactions with participants, centralizing decision-making in prioritizing research protocols, establishing biobanks, adopting novel informatics platforms, and distributing study drugs in unconventional ways. National CTSA Steering Committee meetings provided an opportunity to share best practices and develop the idea of capturing the CTSA program experiences in a series of papers. Here we bring together the recommendations from those papers in a list of specific actions that research sites can take to strengthen operations and prepare for similar future public health emergencies. Most importantly, creative innovations developed in response to the COVID-19 pandemic deserve serious consideration for adoption as new standards, thus converting the painful trauma of the pandemic into “post-traumatic growth” that makes the clinical research enterprise stronger, more resilient, and more effective.

There is an urgent need for vaccines to the 2019 coronavirus (COVID19; SARS-CoV-2). Vaccine development may not be straightforward, due to antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE). Antibodies against viral surface proteins can, in some cases, increase infection severity by ADE. This phenomenon occurs in SARS-CoV-1, MERS, HIV, Zika, and dengue virus infection and vaccination. Lack of high-affinity anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG in children may explain the decreased severity of infection in these groups. Here, we discuss the evidence for ADE in the context of SARS-CoV-2 infection and how to address this potential translational barrier to vaccine development, convalescent plasma, and targeted monoclonal antibody therapies.

Introduction: Recently, volumetric absorptive microsampling (VAMS) has been used for accurate sampling of a fixed peripheral blood volume (10 µL) on a volumetric swab, and long-term sample storage. The mPlex-Flu assay is a novel, high-throughput assay that simultaneously measures the concentration of antibodies against the hemagglutinin (HA) proteins from multiple influenza virus strains with ≤5 µL of serum. Here we describe combining these two methods to measure multidimensional anti-influenza IgG activity in whole blood samples collected by a finger stick and VAMS, with correction for serum volume based on simultaneous hemoglobin measurement. Methods: We compared capillary blood samples obtained from a finger stick using a VAMS device with serum samples collected by traditional phlebotomy from 20 subjects, with the influenza antibody profiles measured by the mPlex-Flu assay. Results: We found that results with the two sampling methods were highly correlated within subjects and across all influenza strains (mean R2 = 0.9470). Adjustment for serum volume, based on hemaglobin measurement, was used to estimate serum volume of samples and improved the accuracy. IgG measurements were stable over 3 weeks when VAMS samples were stored at room temperature or transported using a variety of shipping methods. Additionally, when volunteers performed finger-stick VAMS at-home by themselves, the comparison results of anti-HA antibody concentrations were highly consistent with sampling performed by study personnel on-site (R2 = 0.9496). Conclusions: This novel approach can provide a simple, accurate, and low-cost means for monitoring the IgG anti-influenza HA antibody responses in large population studies and clinical trials.

Mini-sabbaticals are formal short-term training and educational experiences away from an investigator’s home research unit. These may include rotations with other research units and externships at government research or regulatory agencies, industry and non-profit programs, and training and/or intensive educational programs. The National Institutes of Health have been encouraging training institutions to consider offering mini-sabbaticals, but given the newness of the concept, limited data are available to guide the implementation of mini-sabbatical programs. In this paper, we review the history of sabbaticals and mini-sabbaticals, report the results of surveys we performed to ascertain the use of mini-sabbaticals at Clinical and Translational Science Award hubs, and consider best practice recommendations for institutions seeking to establish formal mini-sabbatical programs.