I’m motivated by knowing my work can truly help others

How did you get into science and join CLIP?

It was largely a matter of chance. I originally wanted to study medicine and was actually accepted. The plan seemed clear — to follow that path. But as a backup I also applied to the Faculty of Science. Gradually, I realised I was more drawn to discovering things and exploring new questions. It started to make more sense to pursue the natural sciences.

And how did you find your way into this research group?

During my bachelor’s studies I worked in a different research group in Brno, but I wanted to move to Prague. CLIP attracted me because, in my view, it is one of the highest-quality groups — not only here, but in a broader context. I also really value the connection between basic research and clinical practice. That is exactly what I would like to do.

What criteria did you use when choosing a research group?

Mainly the people. There are highly successful scientists here whose names frequently appear in haematology and leukaemia research — both in publications and within the professional community. That convinced me.

Was it difficult to get into such a group?

There was definitely an element of luck. The group primarily looks for PhD students rather than undergraduates, but in the end it worked out and I was given the opportunity to get involved.

What does your research focus on?

We study the reconstitution of the immune system in children after immunotherapy for acute lymphoblastic leukaemia. Immunotherapy is now often added to standard chemotherapy, allowing lower doses and reducing side effects.

However, it appears that the treatment can have long-term effects on the immune system. We investigate how immunity recovers after treatment and why, in some patients, it does not function as well as it should.

Where does genetics come into this?

Within CLIP, we are divided into cytometry and genetics, and our project reflects that structure. We work with DNA from patients’ lymphocytes, which we sequence. We focus on two main aspects: the diversity of immune receptors — how many different clones of B and T cells a patient has — and mutations in genes associated with immune function. This allows us to estimate how effectively the immune system can respond to infections.

Are you already finding concrete answers?

We have our first results. In patients with poor immune recovery, we identified certain pathogenic variants in genes associated with immunodeficiencies. However, we cannot yet say that we have found a definitive cause. Rather, we are working with the hypothesis that genetic predispositions may manifest under significant stress, such as intensive treatment.

When might this hypothesis be confirmed?

I think it will take several years. We could have stronger initial results within about one to one and a half years, but we will need larger patient cohorts and international collaboration.

Is it possible to balance full-time study and research?

Yes, but it requires good time management. At Master’s level there is greater emphasis on the thesis, so there is more room for research. It can be demanding at times, but it is manageable.

Do you see value in working within such an interdisciplinary team?

Definitely. At CLIP, natural scientists and technicians work together with clinicians and bioinformaticians. I approach things from a biological perspective — how cells and processes function — while clinicians bring the perspective of the patient and treatment. And our bioinformatics colleagues extract results from large volumes of data. This integration is extremely valuable. It helps you realise that your work has a real, tangible impact.

Would you like to continue working in the group?

Absolutely. I would like to complete the project I have been involved in from the beginning and see where it leads. At the same time, I have discovered many new questions I would like to explore in the future.

You recently gave your first conference presentation — at the faculty’s Scientific Conference in April. What was that experience like?

For me personally, presenting is challenging, so it meant stepping out of my comfort zone. It was stressful, but at the same time I am glad I had the opportunity to try it, especially in a familiar environment.

What did you take away from it?

Probably that I should enjoy it more and stress less. And also the feeling that what I do is interesting to others, especially clinicians. That is very motivating.