David Pellman was elected as an EMBO Associate Member in 2025. The election recognizes him as an eminent scientist who resides outside of the EMBC Member States. He is Professor of Cell Biology at Harvard Medical School and Margaret M. Dyson Professor of Paediatric Oncology at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, US, and Investigator at the Howard Hughes Medical Institute. Here, he reflects on his unconventional career path, his research, science communication and the role of EMBO.
You have a medical degree from the University of Chicago. What inspired you to pursue research?
It was a bit of happenstance. I am not the typical scientist who played with a chemistry set in the basement when in elementary school. I had several, inchoate ideas about what I wanted to do. But I did always like science, and I did come from a family of several generations of physicians, which led me to think more about medicine.
As an undergraduate I was trying to improve my CV for medical school applications by spending a summer in a lab in New York, where I grew up and my family was. I worked as a summer student and then as a one-year technician with Saburo Hanafusa, one of the lions of the oncogene and RNA tumour virus field, at Rockefeller University. I had an amazing experience and got totally hooked on research. I even thought about leaving medical school and pursuing a PhD, but for a variety of personal reasons I completed my medical training. But I knew that I was going to combine research with medicine.
Then, during my fellowship training as a paediatrician and paediatric oncologist, I needed to do some research. I had read a lot during my training, got more interested in fundamental science and decided to work with Gerald Fink, a yeast geneticist at the Whitehead Institute. That was a somewhat unconventional choice for someone with a medically oriented career, but it was a wonderful choice for me personally. I learned a lot and came to appreciate great science.
Can you tell us about a defining moment in your career?
I am not completely serious … but my defining moment was when I discovered that DNA was the genetic material. It turned out I was not the first to make this discovery. I had learned about molecular biology—the three-letter code, etc.—as an undergraduate, but somehow, I did not really believe it. It almost seemed too easy, too simple. But when I did my first cloning experiment and it worked, it was a mini defining moment for me.
What is the focus of your current research?
My lab studies mutational processes that drive rapid evolution of genomes. We are particularly interested in how errors in the segregation of chromosomes create aberrations in nuclear morphology (e.g., micronuclei, which are chromosomes that are encapsulated in their own nucleus, and chromosome bridges, chromatin threads that connect daughter cells. These aberrations are part of a group of abnormalities that are common in tumours and collectively known as cancer nuclear atypia. Clinicians and pathologists use the degree of nuclear abnormalities in cancer to predict prognoses, assign tumour grades and even choose therapies. We study the underlying biology.
These nuclear aberrations can generate extensive DNA damage and can lead to chromothripsis, a phenomenon in which chromosomes shatter and randomly rejoin. We have recreated chromothripsis in an experimental system using an approach we call Look-Seq. We were able to make the direct link between the abnormal structures and the catastrophic mutational processes. We are now working on similar catastrophic processes derived from cell division errors that alter the genome in cancer and cause rapid genome evolution.
What role do open data sharing and freely available resources have for your work?
We depend on our colleagues to share reagents. I trained in yeast genetics, and the yeast community is exceptionally good about sharing reagents. We publish reagents. We share reagents and don’t ask what people plan to do with them. We also try to share unpublished reagents where feasible.
Databases like the Sequence Read Archive (SRA) are also very important for us, as we create a lot of sequence and imaging data.
What major challenges does the global life sciences community face today? What opportunities do you see arising from them?
A real challenge right now is the perception of science in the society.
After the launch of Sputnik, there was an effervescent period in the 1950s and 1960s, in particular in the United States, with enthusiasm and a recognition that investment in science could add to our culture, drive economic activity and contribute to national welfare, including defence. People across the political spectrum believed in supporting science and perceived it as beneficial to the society. Organizations such as EMBO have been fantastic in providing leadership and helping get this message out.
Unfortunately, we are now in a period with much more scepticism about science. Scientists want to discover things and contribute to knowledge, but they do not naturally reach out to the public and communicate about science. As the societal value of science has not changed, it is important that we communicate better.
What does your election as an EMBO Associate Member mean to you?
It is a tremendous honour, and I appreciate the recognition for me and for my group. I have always had many important scientific connections in Europe and trainees from Europe. I believe that science is an international endeavour. EMBO does a tremendous job in fostering international exchange of ideas and international collaboration. I am very happy to participate and hope that I can give a little bit back.
