Edited by Senior Editor, Dr Anna Melidoni
AM: Tell us a bit about yourself and your current focus of research.GB: My academic training and research experience provided me with an excellent background in multiple biological disciplines, including Cell and Molecular Biology, Biochemistry, and Genetics. Originally trained as a molecular biologist and biochemist, I have confined my research interests to cardiac diseases. As part of my Ph.D. from the University of Greifswald, Germany, I had the opportunity to gain expertise in mass spectrometric-based proteomic applications and used these to discover molecular mechanisms and biosignatures from human biopsies and plasma of dilated cardiomyopathy patients treated with immunoadsorption therapy. Post Ph.D., I expanded my research prospects understanding insulin signaling in the heart and muscle. In this regard, my scientific knowledge base and technical training in molecular research helped me embrace new model systems. They accelerated my expertise during my post-doctoral fellowship at the Carver College of Medicine, University of Iowa, USA. During my initial post-doctoral time, I investigated the role of insulin and FoxO transcription factors (FoxOs) on mitochondrial dysfunction in muscle using various muscle-specific knock-out mice models and in-vitro systems. As a senior research investigator, I’m currently investigating the role of FoxOs in the progression of diabetic cardiomyopathy. I believe our results will provide better insight into the molecular mechanisms of critical pathways that occur in diabetic hearts and potentially identify novel therapeutic targets for treating this disease
AM: What do you think is the most fascinating recent development in cardiovascular research/Cardiology?
GB: Better pathophysiological understanding and the development of new diagnostic and therapeutic strategies have decreased cardiovascular mortality during the last decades. Countless discoveries have occurred in recent years, but I could highlight two main discoveries directly connected to my diabetes research. A recent study (Gopal et al., Cell Report 2021) demonstrated that the genetic and pharmacological inhibition of Forkhead box O1 (FoxO1) improves type 2 diabetes-related diastolic dysfunction by increasing myocardial pyruvate dehydrogenase activity. Additionally, through various muscle-specific knock-out models, we (Bhardwaj et al., JCI 2021) showed that deletion of FoxOs completely rescue the mitochondrial dysfunction and muscle atrophy induced in insulin-resistant and type 1 diabetes mice models. These studies indicated that FoxOs on activation induce destructive processes and inhibiting these have a high therapeutic potential for diabetic patients to improve cardiac and muscle function. Another fascinating breakthrough discovery of year 2022 is the first successful transplant of a genetically modified pig’s heart into a human at the University of Maryland School of Medicine. This heart transplantation will offer new options to individuals who need new organs and help the heart shortage crisis.
AM: Is there an area of Cardiovascular biology/Cardiology that you think is currently under-explored?
GB: Diabetic cardiomyopathy is an under-explored field, and even after decades of research, the early diagnosis is poorly available. The molecular mechanisms and how diabetes induces diastolic and systolic dysfunction in the hearts are unknown. The common drugs given to diabetic cardiomyopathy patients are either glucose-lowering or those given to heart failure patients, and until now, specific drugs for these patients are unavailable.
AM: Where do you see (or where would you like to see) the cardiovascular/Cardiology research field 10 years from now?
GB: Discoveries in cardiovascular basic and clinical research have been remarkably successful in the past century in developing therapies to prevent and treat the world’s leading cause of morbidity and mortality. I believe this trend will continue for the next many years. The scientific world will develop new ideas, molecular mechanics, and more effective ways to reduce the burden of cardiovascular diseases. Apart from basic research, the tremendous advancement of artificial intelligence and digital health technology will help to prevent and treat heart diseases. However, job opportunities for young scientists in academia and insufficient funding seem a threat in all of these advancements.
AM: Can you think of any collective initiatives that could support/speed up ‘bench to bedside’ research?
GB: Universities and research institutes play a vital role in basic research, but the required infrastructure, skills, and resources for translational research are not readily available in these laboratories. I believe there is a lack of collaboration between academic and industrial researchers and the funding bodies, and this unorganized system impedes bench-to-bedside research. Strengthening the partnership between pharma industries and research institutions, building a strong infrastructure resource, and training young researchers towards the bench side may help in accelerating bench-to-bedside research.
AM: What does it mean to you to be an Editorial Board Member for BMC Cardiovascular Disorders?
GB: It is an honor and privilege to contribute to BMC Cardiovascular Disorders as an EBM. As an early-career investigator, this role helped me understand every segment of the scientific research work from the bench side up to the peer-reviewed publication. It is a challenging job considering my full-time job in academics. But I enjoy it because it keeps me updated with the recent and interesting advances and discoveries in the field. It helps me determine the groups and people working in a specific area. Nevertheless, it helps me to understand different perspectives, generate new ideas and eventually become an expert in my field. As such, I rigorously evaluate articles submitted to BMC Cardiovascular Disorders and thus commit to improving the quality of research studies published in this esteemed journal.
AM: What is one piece of advice you would give to reviewers as an EBM overseeing peer review ?
GB: The peer-review process is critical for publishing exciting and authentic scientific findings, and the reviewer's role gets crucial here. Reviewer's comments are the building blocks for the editorial board's decision. My advice to all potential reviewers is:Accomplish the assignment on time Keep an unbiased approachProvide comprehensive and constructive scientific comments in a friendly mannerHighlight the significance of an article you review, thereby helping the associate editor make a final decision.Inform the EBM if they cannot handle or understand any specific part of the manuscript, such as statistical and bioinformatics analysis.Additionally, if needed, reviewers should enrol in various training courses available online at various publishing journals, including at BMC Cardiovascular Disorders, to improve the skills required for best and ethical review practice.
AM: What is one piece of advice you would give to prospective authors ?
GB: Though I firmly believe that authors rigorously review and edit the manuscript before submission, additional editing is still required during the revision cycle until it's not finally published. I consider multiple rounds of reviewing process are always better. Therefore, I would highly recommend authors to:Share the manuscript with their colleagues, other Professors, and scientific staff (PhDs, Research Associates, and Postdoctoral Fellows) and get their honest feedback and additional eye-scan before final submission. I would encourage authors to mention additional scientific queries, limitations of their studies/methods used, a biased approach followed during analysis (if any), and results with the conclusion and interpretation. If English is not their first language, I would recommend authors utilize institutional/private creative writing and editing services. Authors should be careful about grammar, data analysis, data interpretation and, content such as the title, abstract, results and the discussion should be aligned.
AM: What would you change in scientific publishing if you could?
GB: Every publishing group demands and follows different structures, styles, rules, and regulations for publishing research work. This system should be more centralized and follow at least a consistency in format style and peer-reviewed process to save time and energy in editing and formatting.At last, I believe that publishing negative results will contribute to reporting more ethical and honest research. I envision a more transparent reviewing process. The published article should be freely accessible to all. Articles must include a summary for readers with little to no scientific understanding. Appropriate recognition, acknowledgment, and reward system for un-paid reviewers and editorial board members will improve the peer-review process.
