What first drew you to drug discovery?
My path into drug discovery was not entirely planned. Like many scientists, I found that career opportunities and life circumstances often intersect, and in my case that meant moving across several countries while pursuing research at the interface of mechanistic pharmacology, structural biology, computational biology and drug discovery.
My scientific journey took me from Bangalore, India, through Atlanta in the US to Oeiras in Portugal, until I found myself at an inflection point. I was keen to avoid another traditional postdoctoral position and was increasingly attracted to the growing emphasis in industry on mechanistic pharmacology and translational science. Joining AstraZeneca in Cambridge, UK, under visionary scientific leadership, provided an ideal environment to pursue those interests.
Ultimately, what attracted me most was the opportunity to move beyond understanding biological systems in isolation and instead contribute to research that might eventually improve patient outcomes.
You've worked in academia, big pharma and now Cancer Research Horizons. What have you learned from each environment?
Despite their different structures and objectives, the foundations of success remain remarkably similar. Whether operating in a university laboratory, a commercial research organisation or a non-profit, meaningful scientific advances are built upon curiosity, rigorous investigation and a willingness to challenge established assumptions.
Academia taught me to ask 'why?' and 'how?'. Drug discovery organisations taught me to ask 'so what?'
At the same time, each environment has shaped how I think about scientific questions. Academia taught me the importance of asking “why?” and “how?” and pursuing answers driven by intellectual curiosity. Drug discovery organisations taught me to ask an equally important question: “so what?” Understanding a mechanism is valuable, but understanding how that knowledge can be translated into meaningful impact is what ultimately moves science forward. The most rewarding research often emerges when these perspectives are combined.
Your research spans many different areas, including molecular glues, covalent inhibitors and enzyme kinetics. What connects them?
I have always been more interested in important questions than in disciplinary boundaries. Many scientists understandably work within a specific area of expertise, but I have generally preferred to begin with the question itself and then identify the tools, methods and collaborators required to address it.
The most exciting discoveries often occur at the intersections between fields rather than within them.
Working this way has two advantages. First, it preserves creativity by preventing scientific problems from being viewed exclusively through the lens of a single discipline. Second, it creates opportunities to learn continuously from collaborators with diverse expertise. The most exciting discoveries often occur at the intersections between fields rather than within them.
A recurring theme across much of my work is an interest in the role of time in pharmacology and drug discovery. I am fascinated by how target engagement kinetics interact with protein turnover and pharmacokinetics to influence therapeutic outcomes. This perspective has shaped my interest in molecular glue degraders, irreversible inhibitors and conventional reversible small molecules alike. More broadly, I am interested in understanding pharmacology from a systems perspective, asking how molecular perturbations propagate across biological networks to ultimately produce therapeutic benefit.
What developments in drug discovery are you most excited about?
Two areas of research particularly excite me. One concerns the evolution of drug–target interaction kinetics during medicinal chemistry optimisation. Historically, drug discovery has been exceptionally successful at optimising thermodynamic measures such as affinity and potency. However, our analyses suggest that we have been far less successful at systematically controlling kinetic properties such as association and dissociation rates.
Our findings show that kinetic behaviour may be governed less by incremental small-molecule modification and more by the conformational landscape sampled by the target protein itself. If this observation continues to hold across larger datasets, it could fundamentally influence how we conduct optimisation campaigns. In the future we may place greater emphasis on understanding protein conformational ensembles and mechanistic biology before we undertake extensive potency optimisation.
Another area I find exciting stems from collaborative work with Professor Jeffrey Skolnick. We’ve been investigating whether metabolites play a much broader organisational role in biology than previously thought. Our studies suggest that evolutionarily ancient metabolites may act as hidden connectors linking proteins, pathways and biological processes across the proteome. This metabolite-centred view of biology has the potential to reshape how we understand protein function, cellular organisation and disease mechanisms. Ultimately, deeper mechanistic insights of this kind may open entirely new avenues for identifying therapeutic vulnerabilities in cancer and other diseases.
You also devote a lot of time to science engagement. Why is that important to you?
For me, one of the greatest privileges of being a scientist is the opportunity to share the excitement of discovery with others. Scientific knowledge becomes far more valuable when it inspires curiosity in the next generation.
The most valuable scientific advances often begin with simple, insightful questions rather than sophisticated technical skills.
Outreach gives me the opportunity to pass on the knowledge and experience I’ve gained throughout my career. If even a small number of students become more confident about pursuing science because of a conversation, workshop or mentorship interaction, the effort is worthwhile.
Equally important, however, is what I learn in return. Interacting with students, teachers and members of the public continually exposes me to fresh perspectives and unconventional ways of thinking. It serves as a reminder that expertise can sometimes become restrictive if we are not careful. The most valuable scientific advances often begin with simple, insightful questions rather than sophisticated technical skills.
What are you most excited about exploring next?
On the scientific front, I am keen to further explore the role of kinetics in informing drug discovery decisions and to understand, at a deeper level, how metabolites organise cellular architecture.
But what excites me most is not the science in isolation, but the opportunity to build connections between disciplines, communities and ideas, because meaningful innovation often emerges where different perspectives intersect.