Starting out on an academic career can be daunting. Some aspiring academic physician scientists, frustrated by the never-ending need to apply for grants to support their research, leave academia for other pastures. Others thrive on the grant-writing/reviewing/revising cycle and are funded often enough to pursue that academic career.

Still others have been able to combine solid ideas and research, important support – including internal support – and good fortune. An example of this “other” is Everett Meyer, MD, PhD, Assistant Professor and director of the Immune Genomics Initiative for the Blood and Marrow Transplantation Division. Meyer readily admits, “a lot of it is luck and I’ve been very lucky.”

Asked about his approach to building and maintaining his career at Stanford, Meyer offered a variety of suggestions. First, do what you love.

“Part of the strategy that I’ve adopted has three tenets: 1) pick projects you love that you think about going to bed or driving that just captivate you; 2) try to figure out how it applies clinically in innovative ways; 3) get it integrated into teams that are working on these issues. Team science is pretty critical; being involved in teams is going to become more and more important.“

Second, listen to the advice of others but make your own way. “There’s an old model where you pick a lab and the lab mentor does everything. And while I think there’s a lot to that, I think that being a clinical fellow or a physician scientist is a little bit different because a lot of your questions aren’t necessarily answerable within the confines of one lab. You can’t be a master of all trades, do everything at one bench, and then be expected to go see patients.

“The one piece of advice that I try to give people just behind me is be aggressive because the old pathway doesn’t exist any more. The timing and pacing and approach that you may be advised to follow doesn’t apply any more. Some senior mentors will encourage you to wait to apply for a K08 or wait to apply for a career award, but today I think that strategy isn’t helpful.

“I’ve seen with some of my peers what happens is they overripen on the vine and then they leave academia. Even if you don’t think you’re quite ready, get together the minimum amount of data that you think you need to apply for those career grants. I think that a lot of young investigators, particularly myself, were reluctant to do that before we completed essentially another full PhD dissertation, but there’s really no time for that anymore.”

Meyer’s strategy has worked for him: he’s received two career development awards recently, one from the American Association for Bone Marrow Transplantation and another from the National Marrow Donor Program. He also recently received a K08 Career Award, which will fund 75% of his time for five years. Yet another significant award is a Stanford Beckman Center Technology Grant. This grant funds two years in which to generate pilot data for further grant applications. Meyer described this as giving him the “freedom and room to do new things.”

And Then There Is Serendipity

Meyer also serves as Site Principal Investigator and a Project Co-Director for a Dana Farber Institute Program Project Grant. Given his lack of seniority, this award could be considered unusual, but Meyer explains it differently. “That’s serendipity. My PhD advisor, who had been leading this project, left academia. The NIH Program Officer told him to “please find a young faculty member (he explicitly said ‘young’) who might be able to take over this project, who has experience, and who could take it in a different direction.”

The NIH transferred the grant to Meyer after he wrote a full proposal and had it reviewed. The remaining support is for only 1.5 years but it is subject to renewal. “[My advisor] actually completed the aims of grant. In program project grants, years 4 and 5 are time for exploring what new and innovative things you’re going to do with the renewal.”

“I’m glad I have the freedom to explore, especially early in my career. I am also very fortunate to have hired a research associate who has used a lot of the techniques my research requires. That makes me pretty hopeful that we can really test the boundaries because the learning curve is shorter.”

The Uniqueness of Stanford

These significant external grants have been supplemented by internal support, which often goes beyond monetary resources. Meyer explains, “At Stanford, if you have a good idea, you can find the partnerships, resources, and expertise to help you develop that idea. There is the SPARK program, which I’m fortunate enough to be funded by; the TRAM program initiated by Dean Felsher, MD, PhD, which Dr. Harrington supports and I’m also fortunate to be funded by; potentially BIO X. Even within my own division there are a lot of resources that a young investigator can reach out to for help.

“And what’s unique about Stanford is even as a fellow you can access these resources. That’s critically important because everything is becoming more compressed and more competitive. There’s nothing like getting an internal career award to help validate a young fellow, which then allows you to apply externally for a career award. You get integrated into a program that brings resources to bear -- not only the monetary resources but also the team members’ expertise -- and helps you develop an idea.”

Putting good ideas on paper, looking internally as well as externally for sources of funding, writing and rewriting grants as needed, acting with more boldness than you are entirely comfortable with, and coming across a bit of serendipity are, according to Everett Meyer, among the activities that help launch an academic career at Stanford.