As an annual tradition, the French welcome each mid-November a special vintage, the Beaujolais nouveau, with enthusiastic celebrations and ubiquitous placards that declare that it “est arrivè.” Indeed these were very much in evidence in the cafes and bistros as the first International Congress of the Human Proteome Organization (HUPO) convened in Versailles, France in late November. Although earlier small planning meetings had been held, this was its first major gathering, and it certainly marked the public debut of this organization. There was a total attendance of over 800 people with a full compliment of commercial exhibitors and a very compact and stimulating scientific program. This was a remarkably good showing particularly when one considers that it was organized over a relatively short time and that it followed hard on the heels of several other meetings devoted largely or completely to proteomics. This was due in no small way to a lot of hard work (inevitably largely unsung) by some dedicated people, particularly the local organizers. But one can also conclude that there is an enormous interest in this field and that it is yet to be satiated. Good news indeed for the editors of journals covering this area. Of course, there were some organizational glitches and omissions, but these did not detract in a serious way and can, from an optimistic viewpoint, be seen as items for next year’s organizers (Montreal, Canada; October 2003) to improve on. As is well understood by the leaders and aficionados of this developing field and re-emphasized at the meeting, which featured “progress reports” on proteomic projects such as those on the human plasma and liver proteomes and annunciation of the agendas of several national and international proteomic groups, societies, and alliances, efforts to elucidate the human proteome, i.e. identify all human proteins, their post-translational modifications, their bimolecular interactions, their expression, including both contextual and temporal descriptions, and ultimately their function (which depends on all of these things), will require enormous cooperation and integration throughout the germane research communities of the world if even modest inroads into this massive undertaking are to be made. If for no other reason the coordination that this implies and requires creates a priori the need for a HUPO. In a late 2001 meeting in Leesburg, VA, sponsored by the United States Food and Drug Administration and NCI, National Institutes of Health, it was noted that “HUPO should encourage and support nucleating groups and hubs and encourage scholarly proteome-related activities through scientific meetings, workshops, and other educational activities.” This report goes on to note that HUPO will likely have to raise funds to do this and that support from both governments and corporations are anticipated (and needed). Both were in evidence at Versailles. But what was also evident, and stated in various presentations and forums, was the complexity of the various interests that have or will invest in proteomic research and the fact that their ultimate goals are often directly at cross-purposes. Thus, the now well recognized inherent value of intellectual property, commonly referred to as “IP,” that is the heart and soul of proteomics also represents a Damocles’ sword that hangs over it and threatens to at best ensnarl and at worst block the interactions of the various constituencies, both nationally and internationally. The controversies that arose from patenting issues related to the elucidation of the human and other genomes could be trivial compared with those that will be presented by proteomic research. How will HUPO deal with such problems and perhaps even more importantly what kind of success can be anticipated from those efforts is at present not clear. If HUPO is to continue its excellent start as the entity most likely to emerge as the leader in resolving these issues and fostering the cooperation and collaborations required, it will need to put its own house in order. At present it is hardly a transparent organization, and its structure and governance seem at best loosely defined. Membership, fiscal responsibility, relations with established societies, and decision making are not clear, and its agenda, which is all-important in dealing with the complex interactions of academic, industrial, and government scientists, is not sufficiently promulgated or perhaps even formulated. There is an impressive group of scientists who serve as officers and councilors, so the talent needed to properly shape an effective HUPO is readily available. As with the Beaujolais nouveau, HUPO has now been “tasted” in a broad sampling at Versailles, and its raison d’etre is now easy to see. However, it needs to take the next steps in organizational refinement to insure its future effectiveness.
Read full abstract
Aug 1, 2005
Lennart Martens + 6
Open Access
