Hey, guys. Welcome to the podcast. My guests today are Christina Wright, Brad Atkinson, and Brian Wilson, and we talk about the important role that medical affairs and MSLs can play in diversity in clinical trials. Awesome conversation. I learned a lot. I hope you guys enjoy it. Don't forget to follow us on YouTube and Instagram and LinkedIn, and check us out on Clubhouse Live. Thanks for joining us.
Welcome to MSL talk with Tom Caravella, a podcast specifically designed for MSLs and all things field medical. Hey, guys. Thanks for joining me. Welcome to the podcast. Hey, Tom. Thanks for having us. Yeah. I'm really excited. Really, this is something we've been planning for a while. It's a very, very important topic. I wanna thank Christina for bringing it to me and for bringing the group together. I feel like I have an all star team of folks to talk to, and I can't wait to get into it.
So but before we do that, let me first start with a a disclosure statement and just say that, the opinions that are gonna be stated here from the 3 individuals are their own and not, their company opinions. So we wanna just get that out of the way. And then, I'm gonna have everybody introduce themselves. So, Christina, why don't we start with you? Ladies first. Perfect. Thank you very much. Thank you, Tom. Like you said, yeah, this is a long time coming, but an awesome topic.
You know, this is perfect timing, and we do have an amazing group on the call today. So it's gonna be a really great discussion. I'm looking forward to really learning, from every all of you on here. So thanks for having me. I'm Christina Wright. I am an MSL lead at TG, so I lead the southeast MSL team in the area of multiple sclerosis. And for a very long time, I've had a special interest in diversity in clinical trials. So I am very happy to be on this call today. Thank you. Awesome. Great.
Well, thank you for that. And, who's gonna go next? Let's go. Brian, why don't you you go next? Sure, Tom. So, hey, everyone. Thanks for having me on the show. It's always a pleasure to talk about important topics like this. And for for those who don't know me, my name is Brian Wilson.
I'm a regional medical scientific director at Merck supporting our cardiovascular portfolio and very passionate about DNI, which means diversity and inclusion, and really keying up these very important and relevant conversations. So thanks for having me. Awesome. Thanks for being here, Brian. And, Brad, you're up. Alright. Thanks for thanks for having me, Tom. Again, very excited to have this this platform to share this discussion today. So my name is Brad Atkinson.
I'm one of the regional directors at AstraZeneca, for our MSL fill team in thoracic cancers. I I am the regional director for the WES team, so I'm very happy to be here and involved in some of our diversity and inclusion in clinical trials initiatives within AZ. And, again, just happy here to be here having this broad context and conversation with everybody today. Yeah. For sure. Well, thank you guys again for joining me. And, let's jump into it because, obviously, we've got a lot to talk about.
There's 4 of us. So I wanna give everybody some, you know, ample opportunity to, to contribute. And, so as as we get into this topic, I guess the first question that I have is why. Why is it important for the pharmaceutical industry, specifically medical affairs, to be involved in the diversity inclusion initiatives, as it relates to clinical trials. And I think we're gonna have Brad, we're gonna have you kick this off. Yeah. Yeah. Thanks for the question, Tom.
So I think I think it's important, one, to recognize that, historically, our clinical trial populations, have not been very reflective of the target population who use the medicine. And so, obviously, for a variety of reasons, but most importantly, for drug safety and efficacy, there can be various, variations across the the demographic subgroups.
And so I think it's important for us as industry to make sure that our our trials are as reflective of the relevant population who are affected by the disease and who are gonna use the medications. You know, for example, minorities have historically been underrepresented in clinical trial populations. They make up about 12% of the US population, but only have been 5% of clinical trial participants.
And and even less for other clinical trials like cardiovascular disease and oncology clinical trials, they represent about less than 3% of the population. And we know that racial and ethnic subgroup populations are growing and that we're having more guidance from regulatory authorities to have a more representative trial populations. There's the FDA guidance on enhancing the diversity of clinical trial populations.
And then as industry, we have a a social responsibility, and it's it's a clinical trial diversity is is a part of health equity and fairness and just ensuring public trust in our medications. So we we take this patient centered approach, which means that we we need to develop drugs with all patients in mind as well. So that's the broader landscape. Why medical affairs?
And let us be honest, I think there's a role and an opportunity in more than enough work to share within industry, not just medical affairs, but working with our clinical development teams, our clinical operations teams, medical, commercial marketing. I think we each all have a role into it. But why medical affairs should be at the table and be part of this conversation? I think it it really to me, it really comes down to 3 pillars. And one is one is our scientific expertise.
And so as as medical science liaisons, we're seen as the point of contact for that unbiased credible resource for the scientific and clarity clinical narrative, of what the unmet need is, biology, mechanism of action, safety, efficacy. And we sit across from the table when we're representing our clinical trials and defining that unmet need, of the KOLs or key opinion leaders or health care providers.
So defining what the clinical trial design is, what the eligibility criteria are, why sites are selected, you know, all of that is part of what is represented in our patient characteristics. And sitting across from a health care provider and asking, does does do these demographics resemble your patient population? I think we, as MSLs, being that unbiased credible resource, have to be able to defend that to them, as well. So one is our scientific expertise. 2 is our our relationships.
So, you know, you brought in Christine and Brian, myself, and I. We we have relationships, and these conversations are not easy. Right? Having diversity conversations and and discussions are are not easy. You need to have established relationships to have difficult conversations.
So for us to be able to increase awareness and and educate on need for diverse trials and collect those insights and bring those back internally, we need to have those relationships that sometimes have those, difficult or engaging conversations. Yeah. Yeah. And then I was gonna add just one more. Yeah. The last one, Tom, is is, as the MSLs, you know, we're very entrepreneurial. We're often seen as the CEOs of our territory. So we best know our territory.
You know, what is that geographical representation of the patient population? Who are these those key opinion leaders? Where are opportunities to identify minority sites or minority investigators? So really understanding what barriers and challenges each site may have and being able to tailor our approach to those sites. So, thanks for letting me go on that. That's a great kickoff. No, you that's a great kickoff. I mean, there's, there's a lot to unpack in there.
And I wanna go back a little bit. And just maybe you mentioned some therapeutic areas, and statistics. And just from the first thing you said, it's already shocking to me that the numbers are so skewed, and and misrepresent not then there's a lack of representation. So let me I wanna hear from Brian. Maybe can you is there anything that you can add to that? Any opinions, thoughts, statistics as it relates to the therapeutic areas?
And are there certain therapeutic areas that stand out more so than others as it comes to the as it comes to, the lack of of diversity and inclusion? So thanks for that, Tom, and thanks, Brad, for that commentary. Really good job at laying the landscape.
I think before we even talk about a therapeutic landscape, I think it's very important that we understand the social business aspect of why it's important to include diverse and inclusive action and strategies when we think about clinical trials. And that's because pharmaceutical companies, we're not just here to promote products, and we're simply not just here to develop new therapeutics. We're here to be of service to mankind.
And one way you be of service to mankind is really by understanding what their needs are. And so at Merck, we put patients first. We believe that patients come first and they are the cornerstone of all that we do. And so we're not doing our jobs properly if we're not keeping the patient first.
So I think it's important that we understand that in industry, whether it's pharmaceutical, biotech, or etcetera, we're really in the business of understanding what the health care needs are of the patients that we serve. Now to Brad's point, it is true that those that are most impacted by chronic diseases are not necessarily represented in trials that are developing therapeutic to treat those diseases. And that's why diversity in trials are so important.
They're important because we have to have the right people who and they have to have a seat at the table. And if we are gonna be laser focused in answering their needs, then that certainly has to be an objective that we're constantly thinking of, that's constantly on our table, and something that we're constantly trying to improve. Great. I love it. And and I feel like so we we kinda got the overview in the background to start, you know, an opinion from Brad. We have an opinion from Brian.
So now I wanna hear from Christine. I wanna hear your knowledge and your opinion and your thoughts on this piece too. Instead of getting real granular, I'd love to hear from you and see kinda what your overall thoughts are. Yeah. I thank you, Tom. I really think that Brad and Brian really summed it up well as far as the why. You know, I think the big question is, honestly, I would say the majority of people that work in large pharma biotech get that.
It's just, I think it's important for us to start this conversation as discussed the why. It's important to do that, but I think we are getting to the point where we are understanding that because to Brad and Brian's point, we strive to be patient centric, and we strive to do better for mankind, and we are getting those insights. We are hearing that there is this gap. So we know it. The actual actual real conversation is potentially the granular, like how can we make it happen?
So yes, I agree with everything Brad and Brian says. I think overall, it's medical affairs in all parts of industry, but specifically medical affairs really ties into the scientific aspect like Brad mentioned. And we are trying to advance the science. So that aspect comes into really advancing the science. Let's provide science that actually is applicable that our providers and clinicians can use. And then there are other pieces being patient centric. Like, who are our patients? You know?
So, so I absolutely agree on everything. And I do think now because we're understanding the why, how can we do this? Like, what are the barriers? And then also let's get past to discussing what the barriers are and actually be actionable. And to Brad's point, the field medical team, we we are the face. In addition to other field, teams, we're the face.
So, having the tools, and and, the support, to be able to go out and have these conversations and bring back the insights, I think is really important. And that's why I think, this conversation is is so very important, for us today. So Cool. Well, I could tell you that, we're all in agreement. We we know the why. And we've we've already I feel like we've already covered a lot of ground. But what we haven't what I wanna get to is, like, what are the barriers? And how do we go over them?
How do we get so there's gotta be reasons this is happening, but there's also gotta be good tangible solutions and takeaways. So I wanna make sure that as we continue to use the time that we have, we can educate people on why this is happening and what we may be able to do. So let me let me go back to Brad and see if he can jump in, and maybe you can help us understand why there's such a problem.
Yeah. Thanks, Tom. It's kind of a loaded question because there are so many barriers and challenges to overcome. And so some of those may be, you know, sponsor or industry related, you know, maybe not fully understanding what the needs of the patients are, what the needs of the sites are, how to participate, the ability to identify diverse investigators and diverse sites representative.
It may even start before designing clinical trials again, thinking about epidemiology and making sure when we design a clinical trial that we're thinking about epidemiology beforehand of who the patients are that are gonna be served and making sure that we have maybe recruitment targets for the patients that we want to be served in identifying those sites to to do it. There's there's site barriers. Again, back to the the lack of minority and and investigators and research staff.
Again, we know that, most patients, are treated in the community setting, but we know that most of our clinical trials tend to go to larger academic institutions, maybe larger, integrated delivery networks for these. And so how can we make sure that we're getting, opportunities for community sites that may serve minority populations?
There just lack of awareness, lack of awareness of clinical trials, lack of education about what research means, and and also foundationally coming to an understanding of what, historical challenges, that we need to overcome some of the previous stigmas that we've placed on on research in the United States. So there's there's a number of, obstacles and barriers to overcome. And then on the patient aspect, there's practical obstacles.
How do we, deliver within our clinical trials, you know, these practical obstacles that are on patients, including day care, time away from work, reliable transportation, this this lack of trust that we mentioned in pharma or research, and then health literacy, language barriers. And so I I think, again, it's it's gonna take a it takes a lot of work.
It takes, a fundamental understanding of your geography, your research sites, in aligning with the strategy of your company, with the clinical development program and how we can fully execute this. So it takes a lot of cross functional partners being involved in it, a lot of discussion and a lot of insights. And so, again, I'm I'm glad that we're here today, you know, furthering that discussion and awareness along. Yeah. I mean, we're definitely talking it through.
And I think that, as, you know, as as you're kind of, you know, talking about the obstacles and the barriers, but also had some really good ideas of, you know, maybe how to start to ways to overcome that. So I wanna continue along that. You you mentioned education, and I feel like when we look at field medical being out there in the front lines, what more can field medical do, and how do they arm themselves with the right resources? How do they educate themselves?
How do they go about those conversations? And what goals should be set out from a strategic standpoint from medical affairs organizations to try to impact some of this? I know that that's a big question, so maybe, I don't know, Brian or or Christina, whoever wants to go next, maybe we could just start talking about how to arm medical affairs, specifically MSLs, to start to have these conversations. Sure. So I'm happy to jump in there, Tom, and I'll go back to your comment around barriers.
And where do these barriers come from. And I think it's incredibly important that we remember within the history of America, there has been a series of strategies and societal context put in place that was rooted in separateness. And so what does that mean? You mentioned something very important, education. So let's use medical education as an example. So many people don't notice, but prior to 1923, there were actually 7 historically black medical schools in the United States.
There were 7. And then around the early 19 twenties, there was a report that was commissioned called which was later called the Flexner report, which was basically an evaluation of medical schools across the United States and Canada. And so that evaluation allowed a governing body to assess the merit of medical schools, both in Canada and the US. So what were the results? So the results were dire because it not only impacted black medical schools, but it also impacted medical schools for women.
So some of the key findings from the Flexner report were rooted in separateness. So Abraham Flexner actually wrote in the report that he believed women should not have separate schools, but that they should be integrated in predominantly male schools. And then he also noted within that report that he felt that African American physicians should be limited to the practice of being sanitarians. So not actually being a part of the predominant medical practice, but being more of a maintenance role.
So if you think about that for a second, you can clearly see where those barriers started much, much earlier than this conversation we're having right now, and the ramifications are deep. So after 1923, 7 of the African American schools that were open at the time, that number was decreased, and 5 of the 7 were closed. Over the years, there have been one more medical school that has opened up, Morehouse, and so you now have predominantly three black medical schools.
But it just goes to show you how the context of historical separateness, racism, and a lack of inclusiveness has led us to where we are now. So what does that mean? I think from medical affairs perspective, we have to think about how are we characterizing what an what a academic institution actually is. How are we characterizing what a scientific leader is or what a key opinion leader is.
There are certain criteria across the industry, but we know based on the territory, based on the environment, and the social needs of that community, that can look very different from institution to institution. So we have to become very inclusive in how we're evaluating scientific leaders, how we're evaluating what's scientifically successful, and what does that look like.
Again, it's gonna be very different from region to region and from institution to institution, but we have to have that openness to understand it's not just about the merit of a academic institution. It's not just about the merit of a scientific leader, but it's more about the patience and the need that they're serving. And that's how you can begin to align a strategy that is more inclusive. Wow. That's great. Thank you for that.
That was a, that was an awesome awesome overview and and really insightful. And, I think it sets sets Christina up really good too because I feel like we're we're really at that point where, you know, I wanna tie back in the, you know, what do we do next? I I I love when people get back to me after they listen to one of these episodes and say, hey. I got some really good takeaways, and I feel like I know that I need to take action, and I need to do something.
And, so I wanna make sure I don't wanna jump ahead. I'm I'm I'm I'm glad that we talked about the why and and the history, and I I don't wanna keep jumping ahead. But I'm excited. I see that there's obviously a problem, and we know that it it affects the patient and it affects everyone. So I I wanna hear from Christina and see what her thoughts are on what you think we can do. What what's next, or what ideas do we have that that might be able to start to influence a change?
Yeah. Absolutely, Tom. And, you know, I would love to kick off, and then I love, you know, when I'm done, if Brad and Brian, if you have anything to add. So I can start with, you know, great segue from what Brian was saying because I think that that ties into something extremely actionable that our field medical teams can do.
So when we think about field medical, obviously, we know that every company, every team, there's gonna be different priorities, different activities they're gonna be involved in. But generally, the medical team, they do have certain things are somewhat similar across. One of those is establishing a KOL list or a thought leader list and establishing relationships there.
That goes a lot to what Brian was saying and that, you know, we typically may have a list that looks a certain way, but we may not be targeting someone who does research specifically in diverse patient populations or we might, you know, it depends. But starting there is one good place where you are just like Brad says, you are the CEO of your territory.
You can diversify that territory a little bit by identifying where are those historically black college, colleges and and where are the physicians there? You know, what about those community, clinics that do education at the barbershops or the churches? Like, finding out about your territory and understanding a little bit more is one actionable item, that a field medical team could start really doing. And then, hey. It increased your list and increased your interactions.
It helps all the way around. Right? Other areas that field medical are very much involved in would be in supporting company sponsored studies. We recommend sites potentially. I know every field medical team is different. Right? So I'm just throwing out some things. When you are recommending sites, it depends on what your your role can be there. You can start talking to more sites that have more diverse population.
You know, there's a possibility even when you're gathering those sites to be able to identify if there's some form of way to create a metric or, where you say, okay, well, this this site has has this, has this level of diversity. Field medical can be involved in that. Some other areas that field medical can be involved in is keeping up with that site. You know, keeping up with the PIs and the sub PIs, learning from them and providing information, learning from them and bringing back insights.
There's plenty of ways to do that. And the last thing I'll say and then I'll I'll I'll punt it over to Brad or Brian, and I think this is part of the conversation that's very important. The question is, you know, we know the why, we know we need to be talking about it in the field, but how do we feel comfortable talking about this topic of the need to increase diversity in our clinical trials?
Whether that's valuable or even how to express if there's a pharmaceutical company, which I know that there are quite a few that have publicly said that they want to increase diversity in clinical trials, how do you communicate that?
So I think in addition to being, you know, more cognizant of your territory and really trying to diversify that, being able to provide sites that are a little more diverse, taking that opportunity to start having those conversations with your sites, with the PIs, sub PIs, clinical coordinators, they're all in there and they're available for you to talk to, but also start having, more focused activities to help your team feel comfortable having these conversations.
And and some of those, you know, can be and I can give some examples that I'm thinking of. There are many scientific articles out there that talk about increasing diversity, that talk about, certain subgroup populations and what the data looks like in them. And talking about it from a scientific perspective is what we do. We do wanna understand what does CLL look like in African American patients? What does multiple sclerosis look like in indigenous patients?
You know, and that is a part of the scientific conversation. So having journal clubs on articles that have actually been written by thought leaders that we have. So then we get to learn a little bit more about the interests of those thought leaders by discussing an article that they publish on a subgroup population. So that just causes us to feel comfortable having this conversation and also encourage us to get insights from our thought leaders, on these topics. So I know that I I talked a lot.
I know that Brad and Brian have more to add to that. But that's all I'll add. Yeah. Yeah. I'll jump in, Christina, because I think you did a very nice job summarizing that. And, again, I know there's, again, a lot of industry represented. I also know in MSLs, we have a fire a variety and diverse backgrounds and understanding of what diversity is.
So I think that's the other piece is is we gotta continue having these discussions, this dialogue, but we also have to come with it with the assumption that not all of us, not all of our peers, not all of our colleagues are on the same playing field that we are or at the same point in having this conversation that we are. So definitely providing this education and training and and background. Again, from a health care disparities, foundationally, what does that mean?
What does unconscious bias mean? What are the barriers and challenges that we're facing? Providing the the lexicon for us to go out and have those conversations. Again, we have to have cultural awareness. When we go out there, there's cultural awareness and sensitivities when we have a dialogue and conversation, but we need to continue to have those conversations. Right? So we can't use that as a reason for not having the conversation.
So we need cultural awareness, unconscious bias training, foundational training to go out there and equip ourselves to have those. So when we identify a barrier, we can bring it back. To your point, Christina, we can as our own CEOs and being entrepreneurial, we can identify within our geography then, you know, provided some guidance of who it is that we need to be identifying, who are some of those key opinion leaders or thought leaders.
And maybe that framework needs to change a little bit so we're more inclusive of key opinion leaders. But who are those, and and what kind of conversations could we be having? I loved your discussion also about education in the community setting or in some of the minority settings because we know that clinical trials are a pathway for high quality medical care. So it it's like the the tide that rises all boats.
So having just that conversation and the pace that the health care industry is moving at, having MSLs being part of that, the discussion of what standard of care, what advances are being made, what's being presented at at national congresses congresses, international congresses. You know, those are opportunity to inform, educate, and bring high quality health care to diverse patient populations, not just in clinical trials too. So, I love that context, that framework you laid out there.
I think as, as, industry representatives in medical affairs, we could be doing more to educate ourselves in in being out there and in voicing that kind of, high quality, medical care in clinical trials research for diverse patients. Yeah. I love that, Brad. I love that, Brad.
And when I think about Christina's comments around how do you have a comfortable conversation about something that's uncomfortable for many, I think it's important that we acknowledge that it can be uncomfortable, but what I want all our listeners to know is it's really rooted in a concept in DNI called allyship, and allyship encompasses 3 pillars. So one, it can be you can be a ally to 1, you can be a ally to some, or you can be a ally to all.
So when I think about promoting diversity in clinical trials, I I look at it from the 3 pillars through allyship. And it's very important that medical affairs, as we talked about, we're the ones we're the field facing. We're the ones that health care providers see. But we're not just there to be a scientific resource. We're there to be an ally. And it's very important that we demonstrate that ally through our inclusive behaviors.
What's also important is that we become very brave when it comes to diversity and inclusion and having those conversations within the corporate lens. We must never forget, even though we're rooted in science and we're in medical affairs, we're still within the context of corporate America. So it's really important that we understand that and bring colleagues along with examples within corporate settings. So what does that look like?
So that looks like having diverse opinions, not just in the scientific leaders that you serve, but having diverse opinions on your team, making sure that your hiring practices are in alignment with strategies that bring in diversity of thought, diversity of backgrounds. Also, when we think about medical affairs, advisory boards are a huge, huge area where we can diversify opinions. So is your ad board diverse? Is it ethnically diverse? Is it diverse by background?
We know that more people from diverse backgrounds that have a stake at the table is gonna lead to robustness of ideas. It's gonna enhance our strategies, and we know that, diversity, it improves the bottom line. So we have to continue to think about it through this lens. And when I think about being brave about diversity and inclusion, I'm reminded by a really good TED talk by Melody Hopson called color brave. It really sets the tone in what I feel we all should be mindful of.
And the way she sets up her TED Talk is in a way that resonates within a corporate lens. And so I encourage everyone, don't when you're starting the conversation, don't worry about showing up to the conversation with perfection. You should worry about showing up to the conversation with inclusiveness and with a sense of curiosity. It is through that mindset. It's how you can begin to open yourself up and really appreciate the differences that bind our shared humanity.
And I think if we continue to focus on that, it can lead us down some really, really pivotal paths. That's great, Brian. That's awesome. And I I feel like we covered a lot of ground. I feel like we we hit on a lot of things. We hit on the clinical trial aspect, but we went past that. We totally went past that. I mean, obviously, there's so much involved in this conversation.
So before we finish, I just I wanna give each one of you guys an opportunity to just close out with some final thoughts, whatever it might be, as it relates to, this topic and what you wanna leave people with. I think that that that might be just a good way to kinda finish things off. So, again, ladies first. We're gonna go with you, Christina. Thank you, Tom. So I did wanna say one thing before we close that I think is extremely actionable, for field medical teams.
One of our currencies is to bring back insights. And, you know, I really encourage teams who are interested in doing this to make it a point to have your ear out for, insights. You know, bringing those insights in, having a team that's dedicated to seeing some of those insights, and really encouraging probing questions, for your team to use, like providing those probing questions, actual words can help with the conversations where things are uncomfortable.
But providing some of those probing questions that can obviously provide, some insight. And and I think that, you know, we would all be we would get to a better place when we start actually hearing more and more from the field. And I know it'd be appreciated. So that I just wanted to leave that one last thing there. But, what do I wanna end with? You know, I want to thank everyone.
I learned so much even just in it's just so much insight, so much, you can tell passion, but also just truth in in what you're saying. And I'm so happy that we're getting to a point now where we're really having these conversations. I am, you know, I feel like field medical really, honestly, the more that we talk field medical, we are, we have a very valuable role in so many aspects. But, specifically, we get to be the face of our company.
We get to be the face of the goals and objectives, motivations of our company. And, you know, we have the opportunity to be CEOs of our territory and to really help educate and advance, clinical practice, you know, advance, the you know, advance lives of a patient. So this is just one way to be able to do that. And I just really enjoyed this talk, and I and I love it. And and I would encourage people to be looking out for more conversations like this because I know that it's happening.
I know that's happening at conferences. I know that's how been happening, elsewhere as well. So, so, yeah, that's what I'll leave it with. Thank you so much for having me. Thanks, Christina. Alright. Brad, final thoughts. I think Christina summarized it really well. Again, I I love the, context that Brian used brave, be brave in talking about that allies and inclusiveness, and and approaching it with curiosity, have those conversations.
And then I would leave that there are so many resources out there. You know? So, obviously, look for your internal resources at your company, but then there's so many resources out there from pharma, you know, our resource organization, looking at the FDA guidance on it. A lot of associations have health care disparities and clinical trial diversities, as, as core pillars of their, agendas now. And so I think that's really important to be informed and take a look at that.
And so, I I would encourage everyone to be aware of those and think about how like, Christina provided so many great opportunities or examples to incorporate that into your territory planning and your work and your insights gathering. And then, you know, I'm just gonna leave it. Brian gave a great TED quote. I'm gonna provide one, and I think it's from Maya Angelou, and I think we all know it, but it's do the best you can until you know better. And then when you know better, do better.
And I think, again, there's a lot of great work. We're trying to do better. We're constantly doing better, And and and we're not there yet. There's lots more work to do. There's a lot of partners to engage on on this work in diversity, not just diversity in clinical trials, but health care dice disparities, and structural reforms. And so, I just encourage everybody to do better. Thanks, Brad. That's good stuff. Alright, Brian. Take us home, buddy. You're the last one.
That's why Brad is a guy after my own heart because I love Maya Angelou, and I I'm gonna use another Maya Angelou quote that came to mind after Brad said his. And it's not by Maya Angelou, but it's from early it's an early Roman history. It's by Maya Angelo quotes this quote all the time, but it's by a slave named Terrence. And he says, I am a human being. Nothing human can be alien to me.
And if we can internalize what that means deeply, what it means is we all share something, and that is our humanity. And diversity and inclusion, it's an opportunity to understand what that humanity looks like from person to person. So Christina said it best in her closing statements. We get to do this. Sometimes when we're inundated in an activity or we're going along our day to day, we forget that we have an opportunity. We get to do this, and we can change what doing this looks like.
So to Brad's point, we can get better because through curiosity, we can learn where the needs are. To Christina's point, we get to explore. We get to bring those insights back. We get to bring things to people that they never thought of before, they never seen before, and that in and of itself is valuable. So I would like the listeners to I would like to lead the listeners with, we get to do this. And how wonderful is it that I get to be on this podcast with Christina, Brad, and you, Tom.
And thank you so much for this opportunity. You guys are great, man. This was this was awesome. I'm gonna go back and listen to this again because I feel like I was in it, and there was there were times when I really kinda feel like I need to hear it again. So I hope everybody feels the same way. I hope everybody enjoys this, but I wanna thank you all for coming. Thank you for your insights on such an important topic, and, we're gonna have to think about what's gonna be next.
You guys have to come back on. We'll do it again. We'll do our best. Alright. That'd be great, Tom. Appreciate it. Thank you. Thanks so much. Bye, everyone. Thank you so much for listening to the show. And if you enjoyed it, please subscribe so that you don't miss an episode in the future and feel free to leave a rating or a review or a comment. Thanks again, and we look forward to seeing you soon.