Pancreatic cancer remains one of the deadliest malignancies, with a five-year survival rate hovering around 13%. While other cancers have benefited from breakthroughs in targeted therapy and immunotherapy, pancreatic cancer has largely resisted these advances. Meanwhile, research funding for the disease remains disproportionately low relative to its mortality rate.
For early-career researchers choosing to focus on pancreatic cancer, the path ahead requires exceptional resolve and scientific rigor. In the UNC Lineberger Pancreatic Cancer Center of Excellence (PCCE), a new generation of investigators is tackling one of oncology’s most persistent puzzles. We spoke with three of these young scientists to learn about the rewards and challenges of committing their futures to this field in an era defined by encouraging scientific and technological progress but also financial uncertainty. Each is at a different phase of their budding career, but they all share a common purpose: advancing treatment to have a real impact in the lives of patients affected by such a devastating disease.
Clint Stalnecker, PhD, is an Assistant Professor of Biochemistry and Biophysics whose lab utilizes chemical biology approaches and translational models to learn how cancer cells bypass therapies targeting the KRAS signaling pathway. Ian McCabe is a PhD candidate in the lab of Jen Jen Yeh, MD, Director of the PCCE; his recent experiments have helped to define subtypes of cancer-associated fiberblasts (CAFs), which McCabe and his collaborators showed could be clinically robust. Jaewon Lee, MD, also a member of the Yeh Lab, recently completed his clinical surgical oncology fellowship and is in his final year of research training to become a surgeon-scientist.
Drawn by Urgency
The decision to focus on pancreatic cancer often stems from a desire to confront its daunting clinical reality head-on. “Taking care of our patients makes it impossible to ignore how much room there is to improve,” said Lee, whose dual role as surgeon and scientist keeps him grounded in patient outcomes. “Earlier detection, better selection of therapies, and better ways to predict who will benefit from what—that urgency is what pulled me in.”
Stalnecker was driven by a similar recognition of the unmet need for new treatments. “For decades, we’ve seen almost no significant improvements,” he explained. “Frontline therapies are still cytotoxic chemotherapies, which are not very effective, and other major breakthroughs like immunotherapy have not yet translated to pancreatic cancer.”
McCabe’s journey began with biochemistry research on KRAS, the driver mutation in nearly all pancreatic cancers. When he arrived at UNC for graduate school, he knew he wanted to approach the problem from a more clinical perspective, which led him to Yeh’s lab. “Once you understand how few targeted therapies exist and how devastating the disease is for patients, it’s hard not to feel drawn to it.”
Attacking from Different Angles
While united by their focus on pancreatic cancer, each researcher is pursuing distinct scientific questions that reflect the field’s complexity. McCabe investigates CAFs, which are cells that make up a large portion of pancreatic tumors but have often been overlooked clinically. These are the same cells that normally respond to tissue injury, like healing a cut, but they can be co-opted by tumor cells. “What’s fascinating is that not all CAFs behave the same,” McCabe explained. “Some promote tumor growth, while others actually seem to restrict it.” His work aims to understand how “good” and “bad” CAFs communicate with tumor cells, with the goal of blocking harmful signals while encouraging protective ones.
Stalnecker’s lab tackles a different but equally critical challenge: therapeutic resistance. He works with new drugs targeting KRAS—once considered “undruggable” despite being the first human oncogene discovered in 1982—to study how cancer cells adapt when these targeted therapies are deployed. Asked to elucidate the tricky role of KRAS, Stalnecker said, “KRAS is like a master regulator for a complex electrical circuit. When we block it, the cancer cells don’t just shut down; they find ways to ‘rewire’ themselves.” Understanding that new wiring diagram, Stalnecker hopes, will reveal strategies to block escape routes and make therapies effective for longer.
Lee’s work sits at the intersection of biomarkers and precision oncology. He is focused on validating cancer classifiers that can predict outcomes and guide treatment decisions. “What excites me is how quickly the field is evolving,” he says. “We’re getting better at capturing biologic information and turning that information into tools that could actually change decisions at the bedside.”
Navigating an Uncertain Landscape
For all three researchers, the current unpredictability of federal funding for cancer research and the intense competition for alternative funding can cast a long shadow over their career trajectories and the future of the field.
“The uncertainty has absolutely affected how I think—about the pace of progress, about stability in academic jobs, and about what’s feasible to build long-term,” Lee acknowledged. As an early-career surgeon-scientist, he’s acutely aware of the structural challenges around balancing clinical demands with protected research time while institutions face financial pressure to prioritize clinical volume.
Stalnecker, who is just launching his independent lab, faces the funding uncertainty at a particularly important juncture. “These next few years are critical for defining my lab’s independence,” he said. “Being forced to reorient my research to be less risky would severely limit the potential impact we could have.” He is concerned that an unreliable funding environment forces the field to become more risk-averse, ultimately failing both the public that invests in research and the patients who need breakthrough discoveries.
From his position as a trainee, McCabe pointed out that “it’s a tough time for research at every level. The uncertainty around funding could drive more people toward industry instead of academic science.” Yet at the same time, he wonders whether limited resources might push researchers to focus more sharply on questions that matter most for patients.
Pushing Forward Regardless
Despite slow progress and an unclear future, there is a prevailing sense of optimism rooted in scientific momentum and community support among both young researchers and those who have been in the field for decades.
“What keeps me hopeful is the community,” McCabe said. “The pancreatic cancer research community is incredible, full of creative, determined scientists. We have a really strong group here at UNC, and I think that energy and drive will keep the field moving forward.”
Stalnecker’s optimism comes from two sources: “First, the science itself. The new KRAS drugs and our advanced technologies have created tremendous momentum that these uncertainties can’t stop.” He also finds hope in the people. “The pancreatic cancer community is one of the most driven and passionate groups I have ever met. We are all united by the urgency of this disease.”
Lee echoes that sentiment. “The scientific momentum is real, and the need is so clear,” he said. “Pancreatic cancer has a community of patients, advocates, clinicians, and researchers who are intensely motivated to push progress forward. Even when funding is tight, the commitment to making a difference for patients is what keeps me going.”
The Power of Coaching and Collaboration
Members of UNC Lineberger and the PCCE know that progress in pancreatic cancer research depends on robust collaboration and strong mentorship. For instance, Stalnecker’s postdoctoral mentors, Channing Der, PhD, and Adrienne D. Cox, PhD, taught him foundational skills in identifying important questions and building strong networks, while Kirsten Bryant, PhD, a fellow early-career investigator in the PCCE, has provided invaluable real-time guidance. “Kirsten has made me a more diligent researcher, a more engaged patient advocate, a more effective mentor, and a more enthusiastic leader,” Stalnecker said.
That collaborative spirit extends beyond UNC to investigators all over the world working to tackle similar problems. Stalnecker described partnerships with other academic institutions, as well as industry collaborations that provide access to critical clinical trial data. “This data is only available through these kinds of academic-industry partnerships. We’re always actively engaging with partners to make our research as translational as possible.”
For Lee, his mentor Yeh has been instrumental in teaching him to think like an independent investigator. “What I’ve learned most from her is a commitment to team science, rigor and reproducibility, and keeping a clear line of sight from discovery to patient impact.”
Similarly, McCabe credits Yeh with shaping his broader approach to research and clarifying the importance of connecting it back to our patients. “Fostering a love for the science and maintaining perspective,” McCabe said, “keeps me grounded on the hard days and reminds me why this work matters.”
The Precipice of Technological Promise
Despite the current funding challenges, the researchers believe that extraordinary scientific tools at their disposal offer encouraging opportunities for innovation and will open new avenues for progress in the field. “The pace of research has completely changed over the last couple of decades,” McCabe observed. “Things that used to take a week—or even a whole PhD project—can now be done in a day…we can ask and answer more complex questions than ever before.”
Stalnecker is particularly excited about how new technologies are matching the sophistication of the problem, saying, “With technological advances in AI, multi-omics, and computational biology, we can now perform experiments and analyze data at a level of detail that was unimaginable just a decade ago.”
He also sees his young cohort of researchers as uniquely positioned to leverage these tools. “We are the first generation to fully integrate powerful new tools like AI into our daily work. It’s an amazing time to be in science, and I’m excited to apply every new tool we can to make discoveries that translate into better care for patients.”
Looking Ahead
When asked about their hopes for the next decade, each of the researchers emphasized improving the outlook for patients diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. Put simply, McCabe said he “would be proud if my work could give patients and their families more hope, and maybe, in time, better outcomes.”
Lee wants to see his generation make pancreatic cancer “meaningfully more treatable by making it more predictable—better early detection, better risk stratification, and better matching of therapies to tumor biology,” which could result in “more options, more time, and more confidence that treatment decisions are tailored rather than trial-and-error.”
Stalnecker’s vision is similar: “In ten years, I hope we have fundamentally changed the conversation for a patient diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. My hope is that it will be viewed not as a devastatingly rapid disease, but as a treatable, manageable and, for many, curable one.”
Specifically, Stalnecker wants to make the benefit of new KRAS inhibitors last even longer by creating smart drug combinations that anticipate and block resistance pathways from the start. More broadly, he hopes the rising generation of pancreatic cancer researchers will use advanced computational tools to move patient care beyond one-size-fits-all chemotherapy and into truly personalized medicine.
“Ultimately,” he said, “the goal is simple: to give patients and their loved ones more time, and a better quality of time. That’s the impact we are all working toward.”
—Tyler Rice, UNC Lineberger Pancreatic Cancer Center of Excellence