MicroRNA Therapeutics In Metabolic Liver Disease: Context-Driven Drug Discovery

By Urmila Jagtap, Ph.D., and Frank Slack, Ph.D., Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School

Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) is among the most prevalent chronic liver conditions worldwide, affecting approximately 1.27 billion individuals globally as of 2021.¹ Its progressive form, metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH), drives a clinically consequential cascade: from hepatic steatosis and lobular inflammation, through fibrosis and cirrhosis, to hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).^1,2 This is not a series of discrete diseases but a single interconnected biological continuum sustained by dysregulated metabolic, inflammatory, and fibrogenic signaling networks.²

That biological architecture, with notable exceptions like resmetirom, explains, at least in part, why single-target pharmacological approaches have largely underperformed in MASH and HCC drug development. The disease does not operate through a single node and neither can an effective therapy.^3,4

MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are endogenous, short non-coding RNAs that regulate gene expression post-transcriptionally, with a single miRNA capable of targeting multiple protein-coding transcripts simultaneously.⁵ In the setting of MASLD-to-HCC progression, where lipid metabolism, insulin signaling, stellate cell activation, inflammatory cascades, and hepatocyte survival are all simultaneously dysregulated, miRNAs offer a mechanistic leverage point that conventional single-target small molecules cannot easily replicate.^5,6 The liver is additionally among the most accessible organs for nucleic acid delivery: GalNAc-conjugated oligonucleotides and lipid nanoparticles, providing clinically validated delivery platforms that are directly relevant to, though not yet fully optimized for, the cellular heterogeneity of the MASLD and HCC continuum.^7,8

Realizing the therapeutic potential of miRNAs in liver disease, however, requires confronting a problem the field has not fully reckoned with: miRNA function is not just intrinsic to the molecule. It is context-dependent, shaped by disease stage, cellular compartment, and the downstream target landscape available in a given biological state.⁹ Studies across multiple miRNAs, including miR-21, miR-122, miR-34a, and miR-221/222, demonstrate that the same molecule can exhibit opposite functional outputs in different disease contexts, with direct consequences for therapeutic strategy.^10–13 This article surveys the miRNA therapeutic landscape in MASLD and HCC and examines the evidence for context-dependent biology as a critical determinant of drug discovery decisions in this space.

The miRNA Landscape In Metabolic Liver Disease

Several miRNAs have established roles across the MASLD-to-HCC continuum. In the domain of metabolic regulation, miR-122 is among the most extensively studied. It is a hepatocyte-enriched miRNA whose loss correlates with fibrosis progression and hepatocyte dedifferentiation,¹⁴ and its germline knockout in mice drives spontaneous development of steatohepatitis, fibrosis, and hepatocellular cancer.¹⁵ On the fibrogenic axis, the miR-29 family suppresses collagen expression post-transcriptionally (targeting collagen type I and III messenger RNAs [mRNAs], among other fibrogenic genes), is consistently downregulated in fibrotic liver tissue, and has preclinical evidence supporting fibrosis reduction upon restoration.¹⁶ miR-155 modulates both macrophage-mediated inflammatory signaling and hepatic stellate cell activation in the MASH context, with its net effect on inflammation and fibrogenesis varying by etiology and disease stage.^17,18

In the oncogenic transition, miR-21 and miR-221/222 have been reported as elevated in established HCC.^19,20 Importantly, miR-221/222 upregulation also has been associated with hepatic stellate cell activation and liver fibrosis progression, independent of the oncogenic context,²⁰ illustrating that expression patterns in HCC do not necessarily reflect the sole functional role of these molecules across the disease continuum. The evidence for context-dependent biology in each of these miRNAs is examined in detail below.

The clinical precedent for liver-targeted miRNA therapeutics is evolving rapidly, if not yet mature. AZD4076, an anti-miR-103a/107 GalNAc-conjugated antagomiR targeting insulin resistance, established early proof of concept that liver-targeted miRNA inhibition is pharmacologically feasible in humans, though the program was discontinued before full efficacy evaluation for business/strategic reasons rather than safety signals.²¹ More recently, RES-010 (anti-miR-22, Resalis Therapeutics), a first-in-class antisense oligonucleotide targeting miR-22 as a metabolic regulator, has entered a Phase I randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (EUCT No: 2024-514871-17-00) in overweight and obese participants, with preliminary data expected in mid-2026.²² On the mimic side, MRX34, a liposome-formulated miR-34a mimic, demonstrated some antitumor activity in patients with refractory advanced solid tumors in Phase I, establishing that miRNA mimic administration can produce pharmacological effects in humans, even as the program was discontinued due to immune-mediated adverse events.²³ While full therapeutic validation remains pending, these programs collectively establish that miRNA-targeted agents can engage their targets and produce pharmacological effects in humans, providing a foundation for next-generation programs with improved delivery and therapeutic window definition.

The Fibrosis Window: The Near-Term Footing Opportunity For miRNA Therapeutics

Fibrosis stage is the strongest predictor of liver-related mortality in MASH,²⁴ and regulatory guidance now recognizes fibrosis regression as a primary endpoint in MASH trials.²⁵ Therapies that resolve steatohepatitis without remodeling the extracellular matrix or remodeling stellate cell activation have produced limited durable clinical benefit, reinforcing the need for direct antifibrotic strategies.^24,25

The miR-29 family represents a mechanistically grounded antifibrotic candidate. Preclinical restoration of miR-29 reduces collagen deposition and fibrosis severity,¹⁶ and miR-122 restoration addresses both the metabolic dysregulation and fibrogenic hepatocyte dedifferentiation characteristic of MASH progression.^14,15 This multitarget regulatory logic offers a mechanistic rationale for circumventing the compensatory redundancy that has limited serial single-pathway inhibitors, though the same target promiscuity necessitates rigorous off-target characterization.²⁶

It should be noted that no single preclinical model fully recapitulates human MASLD heterogeneity.²⁷ Mechanistic conclusions drawn from any single model system must therefore be interpreted with appropriate caution and, where possible, validated across complementary experimental systems before informing therapeutic decisions.²⁸

Context-Dependent Biology: The Core Challenge

Beyond the binary classification

The miRNA therapeutic field's dominant decision-making framework rests on a binary: oncomiRs are to be inhibited; tumor suppressors are to be restored. This framework organized productivity in early discovery phases but is increasingly inadequate as a guide for clinical program design.⁹ miRNA function is determined by the cellular environment in which the miRNA operates, the disease stage at which it is interrogated, and the downstream target landscape available in a given biological state.⁹ The evidence reviewed below, spanning miR-21, miR-122, miR-34a, and miR-221/222, demonstrates that the same molecule can require opposite therapeutic interventions in different disease contexts. Simplified target classification is not merely an imprecision; it is a potential pathway to clinical harm.

miR-21 case study: A canonical oncomiR reconsidered

miR-21 is the canonical oncomiR, consistently elevated in established HCC,¹⁹ promoting tumor progression through suppression of phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN) and other tumor suppressors,²⁹ and proposed as an antagomiR target across multiple oncology indications. That literature is substantial. Rodrigues et al. demonstrated that miR-21-5p promotes NASH-related hepatocarcinogenesis,³⁰ and Wu et al. identified miR-21 as a mechanistic link between non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and HCC through modulation of the HBP1-p53-Srebp1c pathway.³¹ These rigorous findings form the evidentiary basis for the oncomiR classification.

miR-21 also has been associated with liver fibrogenesis. Dattaroy et al. demonstrated that miR-21, induced via the leptin-NADPH oxidase-NF-κB axis, promotes fibrogenesis in experimental and human NASH by suppressing SMAD7, an endogenous inhibitor of TGF-β/Smad2/3 signaling.³² Takeuchi-Yorimoto et al. reported miR-21 elevation in rat NASH models and its association with fibrotic severity as a plasma biomarker.³³ Calo and colleagues further showed that stress-activated miR-21 in hepatocytes promotes lipid and glucose metabolic disorders under high-fat diet (HFD) conditions.³⁴ This body of work establishes that miR-21 can contribute to both fibrogenic and oncogenic processes in liver disease and cannot be characterized as uniformly protective across the MASLD spectrum.

Against this background, our recent study reveals a strikingly different functional picture in a specific disease context.¹⁰ In a diethylnitrosamine (DEN) plus HFD mouse model recapitulating the MASLD-to-HCC continuum, miR-21 levels declined progressively as disease advanced from steatosis through steatohepatitis toward HCC in wild-type mice.¹⁰ miR-21 knockout mice on HFD exhibited exacerbated disease across multiple measured dimensions: worsened obesity, hepatomegaly, hyperglycemia, insulin resistance, steatosis, fibrosis, and greater tumor burden at weeks 24 and 32.¹⁰ The mechanistic basis for this protective function centers on Tgfbi (TGF-β-induced), identified as a direct miR-21 target and validated as a gene significantly upregulated in human HCC.¹⁰ Administration of an miR-21 mimic in wild-type HFD mice improved insulin sensitivity, reduced steatosis and fibrosis, suppressed Tgfbi expression, and reduced tumor burden, establishing pharmacological tractability for the mimic strategy in this metabolic-fibrotic context.¹⁰

These findings are corroborated by independent work. Correia de Sousa et al. demonstrated that miR-21 suppression promotes mouse hepatocarcinogenesis in a separate experimental system,³⁵ Lhamyani et al. showed that miR-21 mimic administration blocks obesity in mice,³⁶ and Sun et al. identified miR-21 regulation of triglyceride and cholesterol metabolism through HMG-CoA reductase (HMGCR) targeting in NAFLD.³⁷ The convergent signal across independent groups and model systems reduces the likelihood that the protective findings are artifacts of a single experimental design.

The aggregate evidence on miR-21 therefore illustrates the central thesis of this article: the same molecule can mediate opposing biological processes depending on disease context, cellular compartment, and the dominant target landscape — and therapeutic strategy must follow from that context rather than from expression-level classification alone.

A Framework For Context-Aware Design

The evidence across miR-21, miR-122, miR-34a, and miR-221/222 identifies three axes along which miRNA functional output varies and that must be characterized before a therapeutic modality decision can be made.

Disease stage: miR-34a illustrates this clearly. In early hepatic steatosis, its upregulation has been proposed to function as a protective negative-regulatory feedback mechanism limiting lipid accumulation.³⁸ As disease progresses to fibrosis, the same miRNA activates the miR-34a/SIRT1/p53 signaling axis, contributing to hepatocyte apoptosis and fibrosis progression.³⁹ In established HCC it has been classified as a tumor suppressor, providing the rationale for the MRX34 mimic program.²³ Three disease contexts and three distinct functional contributions from the same molecule.

Cellular compartment: miR-21 is expressed across hepatocytes, hepatic stellate cells, macrophages, and tumor cells, each with a distinct available target landscape.^13,22 Whether miR-21 activity is protective or pathological is proposed to depend in part on which cellular population is the primary site of action in a given disease context; this hypothesis remains to be directly tested experimentally.

Downstream target availability: The functional output of a miRNA is determined not solely by its expression level but by which of its potential targets are expressed, accessible, and rate-limiting in a given cellular state.⁹ For miR-122, in the MASLD context, its loss drives spontaneous steatohepatitis and HCC through its hepatocyte identity and homeostasis functions,¹⁵ while in the context of hepatitis C infection, miravirsen exploited miR-122’s role in supporting viral replication to produce viral load reduction,⁴⁰ validating opposite therapeutic modalities for the same molecule in the same organ — one clinically, one preclinically. The dominant functional target network differs between disease contexts, and this difference governs the appropriate therapeutic direction.

These three axes constitute a minimum validation framework applicable to any miRNA therapeutic program. The modality decision between mimic and antagomiR cannot precede contextual characterization. For miR-29 and miR-122, the dominant evidence supports restoration strategies in MASLD. For miR-34a, the case for restoration applies in the HCC context, but in the fibrosis context, its upregulation as a pathological driver suggests inhibition may be more appropriate, though this remains to be fully validated. The decision for miR-21 is the most complex: in the metabolic disease context studied by our group and by Correia de Sousa and Lhamyani, mimic strategies are supported, but in conditions where miR-21 elevation drives SMAD7-dependent fibrogenesis, the net therapeutic effect of a mimic strategy would require careful evaluation. Model selection, mechanistic validation, and therapeutic window definition are therefore not preclinical formalities; they are decisions that determine whether a program is likely to produce benefit or harm in a defined patient population.

Toward Mechanism-Led Program Design

Expression-level data of miRNAs from patient cohorts, however well powered, cannot substitute for functional validation in disease-stage-relevant, etiology-matched experimental systems and the following recommendations reflect that principle.

Resolve context before committing to modality: The choice between mimic and antagomiR is a conclusion that follows from mechanistic validation in a model matching the intended therapeutic window: disease stage, etiology, and cellular architecture. Progressive disease models, such as dietary models of MASLD and MASH with established fibrosis, capture stage-dependent biology that xenograft systems typically do not.^10,27 It is important to acknowledge that even progressive preclinical models carry limitations in replicating the full heterogeneity of human MASLD, and validation across complementary systems strengthens the evidentiary basis for therapeutic decisions.²⁷

Apply the three-axis framework explicitly: For every miRNA program, characterizing target function across disease stage, primary cellular compartment, and dominant downstream target landscape is necessary before IND-enabling work begins. This applies as rigorously to established programs as to new ones and should be a standard expectation rather than an optional refinement.

Use circulating miRNA dynamics as stratification and pharmacodynamic tools: The progressive decline in miR-21 levels observed during MASLD progression in the DEN+HFD model¹⁰ provides a biological rationale for enriching clinical trials with patients at the disease stage where a specific intervention is most likely to be beneficial. Circulating miRNA profiles should be measured as pharmacodynamic readouts from the earliest stages of clinical development, not treated as exploratory add-ons.²⁸

Design for the disease continuum: Therapeutic strategies that target MASLD, MASH, and early fibrosis are most effective when applied before the oncogenic transition redefines the molecular landscape. Intervening at this early window offers greater patient impact, a cleaner mechanistic rationale, and potentially broader regulatory opportunity than single-stage programs.

Conclusion

miRNA therapeutics are mechanistically well suited to progressive metabolic liver disease. The multitarget regulatory logic of miRNAs addresses a biological complexity that has consistently challenged single-pathway approaches and the liver delivery infrastructure to pursue these programs is maturing, as evidenced by the clinical programs now entering trials. The evidence reviewed here, spanning miR-21, miR-122, miR-34a, miR-29, and miR-221/222, establishes that miRNA biology in liver disease is governed not by fixed intrinsic properties but by context: disease stage, cellular compartment, and the downstream target landscape available in a given biological state.

Translating this biology into effective therapeutics requires building programs on the questions: in which context does this miRNA do what, through which targets, in which cells, and at which disease stage? The miRNA programs entering clinical evaluation in liver disease are beginning to answer these questions, and the field’s ability to sustain and extend that progress will depend on holding context-aware, mechanism-led decision-making as the standard rather than the stand-alone cases.

References:

1. Shi R, et al. Global burden and risk factors of MASLD: trends from 1990 to 2021 and predictions to 2030. J Hepatol. 2025;82(5):856-866. [GBD 2021 estimate: 1,267.9 million cases globally]
2. Rinella ME, et al. A multi-society Delphi consensus statement on new fatty liver disease nomenclature. Hepatology. 2023;78(6):1966-1986.
3. Younossi ZM, et al. The global epidemiology of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis: a systematic review. Hepatology. 2023;77(4):1335-1347.
4. Sanyal AJ, et al. Prospective study of outcomes in adults with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. N Engl J Med. 2021;385(17):1559-1569.
5. Bartel DP. MicroRNAs: target recognition and regulatory functions. Cell. 2009;136(2):215-233.
6. Szabo G, Csak T. Role of microRNAs in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and alcoholic liver disease. Liver Res. 2021;3:36-47.
7. Springer AD, Dowdy SF. GalNAc-siRNA conjugates: leading the way for delivery of RNAi therapeutics. Nucleic Acid Ther. 2018;28(3):109-118.
8. Adams D, et al. Patisiran, an RNAi therapeutic, for hereditary transthyretin amyloidosis. N Engl J Med. 2018;379(1):11-21.
9. Bartel DP. Metazoan microRNAs. Cell. 2018;173(1):20-51.
10. Jagtap U, Quan A, Ono Y, et al. miR-21: A therapeutic target for delaying severe liver disease and hepatocellular carcinoma in high-fat-diet-fed mice. Mol Ther Nucleic Acids. 2025. doi:10.1016/j.omtn.2025.102306. PMID: 39386656.
11. Hsu SH, Wang B, Kota J, et al. Essential metabolic, anti-inflammatory, and anti-tumorigenic functions of miR-122 in liver. J Clin Invest. 2012;122(8):2871-2883.
12. Rodrigues PM, et al. miR-34a in liver diseases: a new potential biomarker and therapeutic target. Int J Mol Sci. 2022;23(4):2267.
13. Ogawa T, Enomoto M, Fujii H, et al. MicroRNA-221/222 upregulation indicates the activation of stellate cells and the progression of liver fibrosis. Gut. 2012;61(11):1600-1609.
14. Esau C, Davis S, Murray SF, et al. miR-122 regulation of lipid metabolism revealed by in vivo antisense targeting. Cell Metab. 2006;3(2):87-98.
15. Hsu SH, Wang B, Kota J, et al. Essential metabolic, anti-inflammatory, and anti-tumorigenic functions of miR-122 in liver. J Clin Invest. 2012;122(8):2871-2883.
16. Roderburg C, Urban GW, Bettermann K, et al. Micro-RNA profiling reveals a role for miR-29 in human and murine liver fibrosis. Hepatology. 2011;53(1):209-218.
17. Bala S, Csak T, Saha B, et al. The pro-inflammatory effects of miR-155 promote liver fibrosis and tumor development. J Hepatol. 2016;64(3):601-612.
18. Bala S, Marcos M, Kodys K, et al. Up-regulation of microRNA-155 in macrophages contributes to increased tumor necrosis factor alpha production via increased mRNA half-life in alcoholic liver disease. J Biol Chem. 2011;286(2):1436-1444.
19. Meng F, Henson R, Wehbe-Janek H, et al. MicroRNA-21 regulates expression of the PTEN tumor suppressor gene in human hepatocellular cancer. Gastroenterology. 2007;133(2):647-658.
20. Ogawa T, Enomoto M, Fujii H, et al. MicroRNA-221/222 upregulation indicates the activation of stellate cells and the progression of liver fibrosis. Gut. 2012;61(11):1600-1609.
21. van der Ree MH, Stelma F, Willemse S, et al. Safety, tolerability, and antiviral effect of RG-101 in patients with chronic hepatitis C. Gastroenterology. 2017;153(6):1448-1458. [AZD4076/RG-101 clinical proof-of-concept]
22. Resalis Therapeutics. Resalis Therapeutics Announces Initiation of Phase 1 Clinical Trial for RES-010 in Obesity. Business Wire. December 3, 2024. EUCT No: 2024-514871-17-00.
23. Beg MS, Brenner AJ, Sachdev J, et al. Phase I study of MRX34, a liposomal miR-34a mimic, administered twice weekly in patients with advanced solid tumors. Invest New Drugs. 2017;35(2):180-188.
24. Angulo P, Kleiner DE, Dam-Larsen S, et al. Liver fibrosis, but no other histologic features, is associated with long-term outcomes of patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Gastroenterology. 2015;149(2):389-397.
25. Rinella ME, Tacke F, Sanyal AJ, Anstee QM. Report on the AASLD/EASL joint workshop on clinical trial endpoints in NAFLD. J Hepatol. 2019;71(4):823-833.
26. Schuppan D, Kim YO. Evolving therapies for liver fibrosis. J Clin Invest. 2013;123(5):1887-1901.
27. Chua D, Low ZS, Cheam GX, Ng AS, Tan NS. Utility of human relevant preclinical animal models in navigating NAFLD to NASH progression, resolution, and the development of cirrhosis. Animals (Basel). 2022;12(19):2631.
28. Bandiera S, Pfeffer S, Baumert TF, Zeisel MB. miR-122: a key factor and therapeutic target in liver disease. J Hepatol. 2015;62(2):448-457.
29. Meng F, Henson R, Lang M, et al. Involvement of human micro-RNA in growth and response to chemotherapy in human cholangiocarcinoma cell lines. Gastroenterology. 2006;130(7):2113-2129.
30. Rodrigues PM, Afonso MB, Simao AL, et al. miR-21-5p promotes NASH-related hepatocarcinogenesis. Liver Int. 2023;43(10):2256-2274.
31. Wu H, Ng R, Chen X, Steer CJ, Song G. MicroRNA-21 is a potential link between non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and hepatocellular carcinoma via modulation of the HBP1-p53-Srebp1c pathway. Gut. 2016;65(11):1850-1860.
32. Dattaroy D, Pourhoseini S, Das S, et al. Micro-RNA 21 inhibition of SMAD7 enhances fibrogenesis via leptin-mediated NADPH oxidase in experimental and human nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol. 2015;308(4):G298-312.
33. Takeuchi-Yorimoto A, Yamaura Y, Kanki M, et al. MicroRNA-21 is associated with fibrosis in a rat model of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis and serves as a plasma biomarker for fibrotic liver disease. Toxicol Lett. 2016;258:159-167.
34. Calo N, Ramadori P, Sobolewski C, et al. Stress-activated miR-21/miR-21* in hepatocytes promotes lipid and glucose metabolic disorders associated with high-fat diet consumption. Gut. 2016;65(11):1871-1881.
35. Correia de Sousa M, Calo N, Sobolewski C, et al. Mir-21 Suppression Promotes Mouse Hepatocarcinogenesis. Cancers (Basel). 2021;13(19):4983.
36. Lhamyani S, Gentile AM, Giraldez-Perez RM, et al. miR-21 mimic blocks obesity in mice: a novel therapeutic option. Mol Ther Nucleic Acids. 2021;26:401-416.
37. Sun C, Huang F, Liu X, et al. miR-21 regulates triglyceride and cholesterol metabolism in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease by targeting HMGCR. Int J Mol Med. 2015;35(3):847-853.
38. Rodrigues PM, et al. miR-34a in liver diseases: a new potential biomarker and therapeutic target. Int J Mol Sci. 2022;23(4):2267. [Protective feedback role of miR-34a in early steatosis]
39. Tian XF, Ji FJ, Zang HL, Cao H. Activation of the miR-34a/SIRT1/p53 signaling pathway contributes to the progress of liver fibrosis via inducing apoptosis in hepatocytes but not in HSCs. PLoS One. 2016;11(7):e0158516.
40. Janssen HL, Reesink HW, Lawitz EJ, et al. Treatment of HCV infection by targeting microRNA. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(18):1685-1694.

About The Authors

Urmila Jagtap, Ph.D., is driven by a fascination with biological resilience to restore balance and the quest to turn mechanistic discovery into real-world therapeutics. A postdoctoral translational scientist at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC), Harvard Medical School, she investigates the role of key microRNAs in metabolic liver disease and hepatocellular carcinoma, bridging preclinical insights with therapeutic strategies. She was recognized with the Founders Fellow Award from the Aspen Cancer Conference 2025. As president and career development committee chair of the BIDMC Postdoctoral Association, she leads programs that reach hundreds of early-career scientists. A committed advocate for women in STEM and recipient of the Inclusivity Award for Women in Science two years in a row, she believes great science thrives where curiosity, collaboration, and community meet — ideally over a good cup of coffee!

Frank Slack, Ph.D., is the Shields Warren Mallinckrodt Professor of Pathology at Harvard Medical School and director of the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center Cancer Research Institute. He is also director of the Harvard Medical School Initiative for RNA Medicine. He received his BS from the University of Cape Town in South Africa, before completing his Ph.D. in molecular biology at Tufts University School of Medicine. He worked as a postdoctoral fellow in Gary Ruvkun’s laboratory at HMS, where his work contributed to the 2024 Nobel Prize on microRNAs for Dr. Ruvkun. He discovered that microRNAs regulate key human oncogenes and have the potential to act as therapeutics. He also demonstrated the first role for a microRNA in the aging process. Slack was an Ellison Medical Foundation Senior Scholar, received the 2014 Heath Memorial Award from MD Anderson Cancer Center, and is an NCI Outstanding Investigator Award recipient.