Defining the Expectations
of Your Center’s Leaders
Cancer Center Administrators’ Forum
April 2011
Cancer Center Leadership Roles
 Cancer Center Director: this role is usually well defined
both by the NCI CCSG guidelines and by the institution
- Vision/strategic planning
- Budget
- Recruitment
- Fundraising
- Equivalent to departmental chair - Space
 Deputy Director, Associate Directors, Program Leaders
and Shared Resource Directors
- Often times the authority, expectations and responsibilities
of these positions are ill defined
Today’s Presentations
 Associate Director Role
- Anita Harrison, Hollings Cancer Center, MUSC
- Melanie Thomas, Associate Director of
Clinical Investigations
 Program Leader Role
- Kimberly Kerstann, Winship Cancer Institute, Emory
- Paula Vertino, Cancer Genetics & Epigenetics
Program Leader
 Shared Resource Director Role
- Stephen Long, Greenebaum Cancer Center, U of Maryland
- Nicholas Ambulos, Director of Shared Services
Associate Director
 Common Cancer Center Associate Director Positions
- Basic Science
- Prevention & Control
- Clinical Investigations
- Cancer Disparities
- Translational Research
- Administration
- Shared Resources
- Clinical Affairs
- Education
 Generally, these positions are considered the Center’s
“Senior Leadership” and report to the Director or
Deputy Director
 Typically, they receive CCSG support for 10-20% effort;
total Center support can be up to 50%
 Meet 1-2 times a month as a group with Director/Deputy
Associate Directors
 Formulate priorities, strategies and provide input into the
allocation of resources
 Closely monitor the strength of several of the CCSG
Essential Characteristics (cancer focus, research
facilities, inter/transdisciplinary interactions,
organizational capabilities) across the Center
 Evaluate Center’s progress in meeting strategic
planning goals
 Expected to be inter-connected with other
departmental/college/campus-wide efforts to build
synergy with the Cancer Center
Defining the Associate Director’s Role
 Create a job description for each
 Role should be distinct from other roles but clarify any
areas of overlap and make sure that these are well
articulated
- Associate Director (Breadth) vs Program Leader (Depth)
 Define what financial resources they have to accomplish
their job and/or what part of the Center’s budget are they
accountable for
 Effectiveness should be annually reviewed (peer review
by other Associate Directors and Program Leaders; EAB)
Associate Director of Clinical Investigations
Melanie B. Thomas, MD
Associate Professor of Medicine
Grace E. DeWolff Chair in GI Oncology
 Recruited in 2008 from University of Texas
M.D. Anderson Cancer Center
 Nationally-recognized for her multidisciplinary clinical
research program in hepatobiliary cancer
 2009 NCI Clinical Leadership Team Award
 Cancer Center supports 30% effort for this role
Authorities and Responsibilities
Authorities and Responsibilities
 Identify clinical research expertise needed and work
with Director and institutional leaders (dept, divisions)
to facilitate faculty recruitment
 Integrate investigators into multidisciplinary groups in
which they are actively engaged with basic and
population based researchers in developing
translational research
Clinical and Laboratory Interface
Established Disease-based Research Groups with Key Clinical Faculty
Breast
GI
H&N
Thoracic
GU
Neuro
Baker
Jenrette
Kramer
Christiansen
Thomas
Esnaola
Chin
Camp
Day
Gillespie
Shirai
Sharma
Reed
Denlinger
Silvestri
Simon
Kraft
Drabkin
Keane
Golshayan
Giglio
Patel
Hem/
Mal
Stuart
Kraveka
Hudspeth
Costa
TRANSLATIONAL RESEARCH
Lipid
Signaling in
Cancer
Cancer Genes &
Molecular
Regulation
Developmental
Cancer
Cancer
Immunology
Therapeutics
HCC Research Programs
Cancer
Prevention
& Control
Authorities and Responsibilities
 Promotion of investigator initiated trials, especially with
Center’s pre-clinical investigators
 Develop consortium relationships with NCI Phase I and
Phase II awardees as well as industry partners to
develop and conduct novel trials
 Promotion and facilitation of the development of
leadership within cooperative groups
 Increase clinical trial accrual; work with Associate
Director of Cancer Disparities to promote minority
participation
Strategies Employed
 ExPERT – junior clinical investigators meet monthly with Dr.
Thomas and invited shared resource directors and program
leaders to discuss correlative science concepts
 Pfizer 3D Program (Sept 2010)
 Disease & Program Retreats
10 in 2010
 Abney Clinical Scholars – HCC salary
support for new junior faculty for
protected time (Graybill, Young)
 Ongoing faculty recruitment – 2010
 HCC further investing in CTO to support accrual/protocol
development (VA, East Cooper, Phase I)
Shifting the Portfolio Toward IITs
HCC Active Therapeutic Studies by Sponsor
2008
2011
(N=122)
Other Peer
Reviewed
3%
IITs
11%
(N=126)
Other Peer
Reviewed
2%
Industry
20%
Cooperative
Group
66%
2 Active Phase I Trials in 2008
IITs
23%
Industry
24%
Cooperative
Group
51%
10 Active Phase I Trials in 2011
15 by 2015
The Next Breakthrough Could Be Yours
• Less than 1% of adults in SC diagnosed with
cancer enroll on a therapeutic clinical trial
• 254 patients (12.4% of new patients) enrolled
onto a therapy trial at the HCC in 2010
• HCC led statewide public policy changes in
2010 to ensure every person with insurance
has access to cancer clinical trials
• The HCC goal is to increase enrollment to
therapy trials to 15% by 2015
15 by 2015
The Next Breakthrough Could Be Yours
• Goals:
- Raise everyone's awareness of clinical trials
- Integrate clinical trials into all standard pt care practices
- Foster culture that values and promotes faculty/staff
involvement in clinical trials
• Strategies: - Continual rounding with faculty/staff about clinical trials
- Identify and knock down ALL barriers to enrolling
- Visuals: banners (12), posters (80), buttons, info cards
- Commitment by MUSC leadership to hold faculty/staff
accountable for growth in clinical trials
15 by 2015
The Next Breakthrough Could Be Yours
HCC Therapeutic Accrual to Cancer Clinical Trials
(assumes a 3% growth in overall pt volume/year)