How did you first become involved with ACTG? What drew you to the network? I came to ACTG through the REPRIEVE and other trials that included international sites, where our site in Bangkok (Thai Red Cross AIDS and Infectious Disease Research Centre CRS) was one of the enrolling sites. Dr. Anchalee Avihingsanon, who is the leader of the CRS, encouraged me to get more involved beyond just running the study locally. What drew me in was the scale of the studies in the network, being able to ask important research questions across dozens of countries at once, which you just can’t do from a single cohort. Coming from the Asia-Pacific region, where a lot of the big HIV networks are U.S.- or Europe-centered, being part of ACTG meant the important questions and knowledge gaps, including comorbidities and aging in our populations, could actually be studied at that scale.
What area(s) of research are you focused on in your work with ACTG? What has been most meaningful? My current work focuses on the intersection of HIV and aging including comorbidities and metabolic complications, the conditions people with HIV are now living long enough to face. Within ACTG, I have been involved with the Comorbidities Transformative Science Group and the Do-IT trial. One of the most meaningful parts has been the studies I collaborated within the ACTG’s HAILO cohort to investigate the inflammatory markers of aging-related conditions such as frailty and cognitive impairment, and now we are able to compare those risks across the U.S. and Botswana cohorts. The other was the REPRIEVE trial where I was involved as a site investigator and the Asia-Pacific representative in the writing group of a secondary lipid analysis. It mattered because as an early-stage investigator from the region, you are usually at the receiving end of these guidelines, not in the room writing them.
How has your work with ACTG influenced the work you do in other spaces? A lot of how I now conduct my own studies came from learning how ACTG trials and studies are designed and governed. When I set up my research programs on HIV and aging, I borrowed a lot from the experiences learnt from the various protocol teams in ACTG. It also opened doors for opportunities, for example, the collaborations I built through ACTG are part of how I established new research collaborations.
What were the highlights of your tenure in the IHIMP? One of the highlights was that the mentorship and support from IHIMP, including the funding support, let me set up the research program around liver diseases in HIV studies in Bangkok. We investigated the genetic variants, especially PNPLA3 and found that the genetic variant, not obesity, was driving fatty liver disease in lean people with HIV, which hadn’t really been shown before. I also had the opportunity to sit on the Study Engagement Committee meetings, where the focus is to make sure the populations who have historically been left out of trials are actually represented in how studies are designed and run.
Can you describe your experience with your mentor and how it has impacted your work? Dr. Anchalee Avihingsanon was my mentor, and she supported me throughout my time in the IHIMP. What I valued most was that she did not just provide mentorship support and guidance; she pushed me to frame the questions myself and introduced me to the right people to connect and collaborate with. I think the biggest shift was going from someone learning how to run studies and following protocols led by senior researchers to someone confident enough to lead my own.
How will your experience with the IHIMP impact your future work? It gives me a network and a way of working that I will carry into my own investigator-led programs. I am now leading independent research programs on HIV-related comorbidities and a lot of the collaborators and the confidence to do it came from IHIMP. I also want to bring others through the way I was brought through, like mentoring early-career researchers, in the future.
Why is the IHIMP important? I believe programs like this are how the field does not just stay concentrated in a handful of well-established senior researchers and institutions. For someone early in their career, having a structured way in, such as a mentor and research support, is the difference between staying a site investigator running someone else’s protocol and becoming someone who shapes the questions. It is a lot of what got me to where I can lead my own program now.
What comes next for you? I am applying for research grants and establishing an independent research program looking at clonal hematopoiesis and aging in HIV. The through-line is to understand why people with HIV age faster and what we can actually do about it. I also want to keep learning about new methods, new tools, whatever helps move the field forward because this area is changing quickly and I don’t want to stand still. I am also keen to build a team since I have spent a while being mentored, I wanted to try and learn more of the mentoring now.
What advice would you give a young researcher starting with ACTG now? Say yes to the working groups even when you feel out of your depth; I think that’s where you learn how the decisions actually get made. And don’t wait to be asked; if you have a question worth answering, propose it. I spent too long thinking I needed permission to lead. You mostly don’t.
When you’re not working, what do you enjoy doing? Outside work I like to go out into nature or go for a run, usually just to be away from a screen for a while. I also love to travel and try new things whenever I get the chance; being somewhere unfamiliar is a good reset.