My first Bioacademy experience was a wonderful one. Not only does the event host several acclaimed professors, but I also believe Bioacadmey holds a strong geographical advantage as Songdo Convensia is located within the heart of the Korean bio-cluster. 

It was an honor to have a chance to listen to Professor Towia A. Libermann’s lecture. Because I am personally greatly invested in cancer treatments, Professor Libermann provided a great oversight on the trends in cancer as a medicine professor who specialized in cancer. It was clear that cancer therapy was now focusing a lot more on individualized treatment. As genetic analysis is becoming increasingly accessible, both monetarily and time-wise, targeted therapy is now becoming the standard for many cancer patients. This is such a wonderful change from the empirical treatment as cancer is so specialized for each person due to the nature of the disease. Therefore, by making treatment tailored to the individual, it would mean the treatment would have much greater efficacy and less side effects. Additionally, it would allow for healthcare to start adopting a patient-centric view as opposed to an empirical, disease-centric one. 

More specifically, Professor Libermann’s focus on proteomics was another point of interest for me. Because late-stage cancer is incredibly hard to cure and even treat, Professor Libermann seemed to be focusing on the prevention of cancer through early detection which would require the identification of biomarkers. However, like Professor Libermann discussed, early stage cancer cells have a significant lack of tumor specific biomarkers which requires sensitive technology to pick up on any faint traces. When Professor Libermann introduced SOMAscan, it was amazing to me how much technology had progressed to be able to identify 7000 different proteins in a single drop of blood. He also provided a real-life longitudinal study where they studied a group of people and assayed all the individuals’ blood samples and repeated doing so for 25 years when certain members of the studied group developed liver cancer. Through SOMAscan, they found out that it had an accuracy of 89.4% and was able to correctly predict whether an individual had liver cancer or not 92.857% of the time. This was incredibly relieving and uplifting to hear because my own father had been diagnosed with, and later passed away from, late-stage liver cancer. I sincerely hope that the future generation will be able to accurately predict liver cancer using at-home blood kits so that people won’t have to experience such a painful memory like mine. 

After Professor Libermann had finished his lecture, I had the opportunity to ask him a question personally. While I love the idea of target therapy and individualized treatments, I also thought it would be more logical to target the underlying mechanism of cancer. Because cancer is so unique with its ability to replicate quickly and seemingly endlessly, I believed it would be logical to target this protein or gene, called hTERT or TERT, to simply stop the cancer from replicating. While it is easier said than done, the essence of the question was why there was such a focus on targeted therapy. Professor Libermann had the perspective of a doctor in that he reminded me how treatments were usually compounded together at the same time or multiple treatments would be used over the period of recurrence. Therefore, it wasn’t just one or the other, but rather that many treatments worked in tandem. 

Dr. Lee (이민섭 부회장) also gave another enlightening lecture with well-organized slides. However, what was most unique was the content itself. I had never even thought of biotech expanding as far as Dr. Lee was imagining. It was mesmerizing to see a whole new world for the virtual “geneverse” in which it could be completely customized to a person’s unique genetics. From avatars to music to individualized number/letter codes, I was really curious about how our genetic data could be used for unique virtual creations. Perhaps most curiously, were the ethical dilemmas that these geneverse and genetic apps present. How will each individual’s personal information be protected? Given the rapidly progressing technology in our modern world and such private and individualized information which is the biological blueprint for all of us, how can we ensure that there will be no data leak? To what extent will our genetic information be used for? 

I believe the tour to Celltrion was one of the most impactful events in my experience with Bioacademy. By seeing the actual company, it was much easier to imagine myself working at such biotech companies. 

In terms of the content we were taught while touring Celltrion, it was quite easy to understand the entire process especially since the White Biotech video lecture by Professor 김승욱 had already covered the major process of industrial production while the Red Biotech video lecture by Professor 박태현 introduced the concept of biosimilar products. From 배양/cultivation to 정제/refinement to 완제/completion, it was well laid-out for the students to understand. It was also particularly informative because Celltrion laid out the process while we toured the facility, giving us a visual and physical example to look at. Our tour guide was especially helpful and clear on what process happened at each location. 

I’m grateful to have been able to tour one of the biggest biotech companies within Korea, and from what the tour guide had told us, I understand that due to certain circumstances we were unable to have an in-depth tour. Because it was such a wonderful experience to get to see the company firsthand, I do not wish for the company tour opportunity to be taken out for following Bioacademy events. However, I also believe students could benefit from asking specific questions to a researcher within the company and seeing what researchers do on a day-to-day basis. If it is hard to schedule a personal interview/meeting with the actual researchers, I still think the students would benefit from perhaps a pre-recorded video interview with them as well.

In regards to the lecture by Professor 민도식, he was such an excellent teacher in that he encouraged all the students to participate and voice their thoughts. It was also my first time learning about the relationship between inflammation (염증) and cancer. Because I didn’t wish to be ill-prepared, I also did some research beforehand. Adding on to what I learned, Professor Min gave a wonderfully detailed lecture on the two types of inflammation (급성염증/acute inflammation & 만성염증/chronic inflammation) and the specifics on categorizing them. The lecture was also very informative on the consequences of chronic inflammation such as 심근경색/myocardial infarction and 뇌경색/cerebral infarction to 뇌출혈/cerebral hemorrhage, and eventually leading to 뇌졸중/a stroke. Of course, I found the relationship between inflammation and cancer to be the most intriguing. While I was aware of how hepatitis A and especially hepatitis B and C increased the likelihood of liver cancer or how a H. pylori infection increased the likelihood of gastric cancer, Professor Min helped in providing the cause and reasoning towards that link. I also really appreciated how the professor stressed lifestyle factors were a major component behind inflammation because it is crucial to have healthy habits to prevent cancer from forming. 

I also had the chance to ask Professor Min about using NSAIDs that would only target COX 2 as a cancer treatment. While still contentious, certain studies have found that those who regularly take non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDS) like aspirin or ibuprofen exhibit less risk of cancer. However, the issue with certain NSAIDs is that when regularly taken, they can thin the mucosal lining of the stomach leading to gastric ulcers because NSAIDs inhibit both COX 1 and COX 2 to prevent the synthesis of prostaglandins. However, there have been selective COX 2 inhibitors (because COX 2 is more heavily associated with cancer) such as the drug Celebrex. I was wondering then about the efficacy of COX 2 inhibitors on cancer and if there had been any studies done on this topic. 

I have no doubt that the last lecture about the Korean college admission system has helped the majority of students. However, due to my personal circumstances and background, certain pathways(전형) are not suitable for me. I am also aware that there was a student from Singapore and a plethora of other international school students which may also cause certain pathway(전형) discrepancies. I believe this lecture could be improved by being more inclusive and comprehensive for the diverse body of students that attend Bioacademy. I also think this time/slot could be used to tour another biotech company. It is my personal opinion that the majority of students could benefit from getting a holistic and personal understanding of biotechnology because I believe most students are attending Bioacademy with the aim of learning more about biotechnology and using it to direct their future careers. However, this is only my opinion amongst the hundreds who have attended, and if this lecture has helped the majority then there is no doubt that it should remain in the Bioacademy curriculum. Lastly, I think it would be prudent to have a more private Q&A session for this last lecture as some students may want advice on their personal situations, and I imagine many students would hesitate announcing their private lives in front of others. 

I hope my review and feedback will provide a beneficial and enriching influence on the future generations who attend Bioacademy for it is such a wonderful opportunity to experience with many lessons to learn from.