Cayla Thompson, PhD, is a Senior Scientist at Fujifilm Cellular Dynamics. She received her bachelor’s degree from the University of Wisconsin - Platteville in Biology and Biochemistry with a minor in Biotechnology and her PhD from the Medical College of Wisconsin in Cell and Developmental Biology. During graduate school, Cayla studied the regulation of intestinal regionalization and won many travel awards to present her work at conferences. Now, she is a senior scientist in the Therapeutics division at Fujifilm Cellular Dynamics where she is working towards advancing a Parkinson’s disease cellular therapy to clinical trial.

Can you describe your academic and professional background? What path led you to pursue this field?

I didn’t settle on a path in the sciences until it was time to apply to undergraduate studies. I started at UW-Platteville as a Chemistry major with an emphasis in DNA Criminalistics with the hopes of working in a crime lab as a DNA analyst. As I came to learn more about what a career as a DNA analyst looked like, I became less excited about that prospect, and more excited about the undergraduate research I was doing in molecular signaling. My experience as an intern at Walter Reed (WRAIR) in Maryland exposed me to several techniques that I didn’t have access to at UWP and further piqued my interest in research, especially with the realization of how research can have real world application. I quickly added a Biology major with an emphasis in cellular and molecular biology, as well as a minor in Biotechnology. A second internship at the Medical College of WI studying the mechanisms of intestinal cell restitution and wound healing, practicing cell culture for the first time, experiencing the welcoming and encouraging atmosphere with intentionally collaborative scientists had me hooked. I knew that I was going to go to graduate school to pursue a career in research hopefully with therapeutic application; however, I also knew that I didn't want to stay in academia as I didn’t (and still don’t) have the desire to run my own lab. I feel most at home at the bench, and I chose a PI who could support a path into biotech industry.

How did you find this particular position, and what was the hiring process like? Is there a typical structure for this in your field?

My husband and I had interest in a few cities across the US that could support both of our careers. I used websites like Indeed to find listings, and I also googled “biotech + city of interest,” to find companies that might not be in those listings. I went to their “careers/job opportunity” tabs to see if they were hiring. I didn’t come across one, but if there was a company that I was really interested in that didn’t have a listing, I was fully prepared to contact them to see if I could be an asset to their company. I tailored my Cover letter and CV to each different application in order to highlight skills most relevant to the position.

The most difficult part was not having a clear idea for which positions I was qualified or even overqualified, but I applied anyway with the rationale that the worst thing that could happen was that I wouldn’t hear back, and that happened quite a bit. I was surprised to get messages informing that I was overqualified; in these instances, companies were looking to fill entry level bachelor’s positions.

Then the interviews started. A company would send an email informing that they would like to have a phone conversation. Sometimes this was one call, sometimes it was several rounds of calls. Most companies wanted to get a feel for how well I understood the work that I did as a graduate student, how excited I am about science (versus just wanting a paycheck), why I was interested in their company and that position, my career goals, how much troubleshooting experience I had, how I handle and organize workload, how I communicate, and in general if my personality was a good fit for the group I’d be working with.

The hiring process can take time (weeks). I’ve since learned that sometimes additional internal (or for global companies, external) approval might be required before sending out an offer. The push for me was that I had another offer on the table and I let FCDI know that the other place needed an answer from me. That helped give the external leads the push to get the process rolling to get an offer in my hands before I accepted a different position.

Now that I am on the other side of hiring, I understand why job listings can sometimes be vague. Multiple groups within a company may be hiring the same level position, so a general listing is posted for common responsibilities. Then all groups review applicants and communicate with one another about who to bring in for each group, or to have all groups interview an applicate. So, apply for those really vague positions at companies you’re interested in because it could end up being a position of high interest to you.

Can you tell us about your current responsibilities? What is a typical day or week like in your role?

Depending on my current priorities, the amount of time spent in the lab versus the office or meeting rooms on any given day is quite variable. There are spurts of days or weeks devoted mostly to lab work if a new assay needs to be developed, a new batch of control cells needs to be differentiated, a manufacturing run is in the works, etc. More recently, I’ve spent the majority of my time on the computer. I spent my first couple of years on the team developing the assays that will be used by the quality control team to test and release our clinical batches. The next year was spent drafting all of the GMP documents to perform each assay which involves an astronomical number of documents beyond simply writing a protocol. I’ve also tech transferred the assays to the QC team. Development reports for each assay, summary reports for each stage of practice manufacturing runs, and several additional documents were written. I’ve traveled to our collaborators facilities to prepare cells for animal studies and reviewed CRO study reports for finalization. I’ve also been asked to train others outside of my group in techniques that I’m recognized as an expert.

What do you enjoy about your current job and work environment?

Because my company is relatively new to the field of therapeutics, this is the first time many of us have been involved with the FDA. I didn’t have any GMP, QC, or regulatory exposure prior to this, so with each step closer to clinical trials, I’m learning something new. I love that this position will continue to evolve as the project moves forward, and that at some point when the therapy is commercialized, I’ll move onto a different project in an entirely different field of biology. 

What are some of the challenging aspects of your job?

My coworkers were always very welcoming, no one ever gave me a reason to feel otherwise, but it took me almost two years to get over my imposter syndrome. That didn’t quite turn around until I realized how often I was asked my opinion, that people relied on me for assistance, and that my ideas were valued. I would have, and should have, started to chime in during meetings much earlier.

Do you have any professional plans for the future? What are some future career paths that could open up for someone in your position, 5-10 years down the road?

Within the company, there are opportunities for me to lead a team or even to be a director in either the therapeutics, R&D, manufacturing, or QC divisions. While a person in these positions may choose to spend time in the lab, it is often the case that the priorities demand attention elsewhere. I’m not quite ready to give up my time in the lab. That time may come in the future, but I am plenty happy in my current role.

What’s changing in your industry? Are there any future trends we should be aware of?

Cell and gene therapy are really taking off especially in the immunotherapy world and perhaps tissue engineering.

Is it common for people in your field to have a scientific/academic background (i.e. have PhDs)? Can you think of any advantages or disadvantages someone with a PhD might experience while pursuing or working in your field?

Having a PhD allows you to get hired into a higher paying position (which comes with more responsibilities). However, we have several employees who started in an entry level research position with their BS who have been promoted over the years to the positions that PhDs would enter.

The advanced critical thinking skills practiced during graduate studies has been invaluable for me in this position. I was lucky in that I didn’t have a great deal of troubleshooting to do during the graduate studies, but the skills that I learned during those years prepared me for the extraordinary amount of troubleshooting necessary in my current position.

Do you have any final words of advice for those navigating these career questions? Is there anything you would have done differently given what you know now?

1. Get your hands on as many techniques as possible and stay current in your awareness of new technologies. Knowledge is absolutely power in this field. You cannot solve a problem with a solution that you don’t even know exists.   

2. You don’t need to stay in the same field that you acquired your PhD.

3. Use your graduate studies to expand and enhance skills that can be carried with and useful to you wherever you go. Communication and collaboration is likely the most important skill to build during your graduate studies that will help you in any career setting. Science talk is truly an art. When we become specialists in our fields, it is easy to use the language associated with that field, but to be able to communicate ideas to those outside of your field of study and particularly to nonscientists who play a critical role in the success of your project is a necessary skill.