On October 23, I had the pleasure of joining fellow Medical Affairs leaders and innovators at the Medical Affairs Technology and Innovation Symposium, hosted by the MAPS Northeast/Mid-Atlantic Chapter in Boston. Reflecting on these discussions, I found the day particularly thought-provoking. The energy in the room underscored how fast our field is changing, but also how much nuance is required to bring meaningful, measurable value to patient care and organizational strategy.
The keynote, delivered by Professor Susanna Gallani of Harvard Business School, really set the tone for the day. I was struck by her illustration of “Laura,” the fictional patient whose ovarian cancer diagnosis was delayed , despite her intentional pursuit of information and therapeutic options related to her symptoms. To me, Laura’s story captures a challenge at the heart of medical affairs: our reliance on retrospective, siloed data points, which leave so much relevant information undiscovered. Gallani’s call for predictive, patient-centered metrics, drawing on everything from wearables to web searches, felt bold and should become more and more practical as AI and structured data services become even more prevalent in our lives.
Her point about needing both technical solutions and ethical guardrails especially resonated. For example, when working with AI, potential mistrust or confusion around data privacy can stall promising projects. The reminder that trust and patient collaboration must anchor innovation is something I try to apply every day.
I was also energized by the first panel’s focus on concrete AI applications, since I share some of the skepticism around hype versus reality. It was validating to hear colleagues from Pfizer, Merck, Vertex, and CSL Behring highlight not just success stories but also persistent friction points: siloed data, AI illiteracy and algorithmic resistance. There’s also the complexity of integrating new technologies into time-pressured, people-driven workflows. That’s something I encounter often, the notion that AI is a plug-and-play fix. In reality, it’s as much an organizational change initiative as a technical one.
One insight I keep circling back to is the human-in-the-loop model. AI, in my view, is best as an extender, not a replacement, for skilled professionals. The idea that medical writers might shift toward “expert reviewer” roles as AI matures is both daunting and exciting. But, process evolution projects are more likely to be successful with grassroots buy-in and genuine co-creation, rather than a top-down edict.
The afternoon’s future-focused panel made me consider how Medical Affairs can proactively shape its own evolution. I was especially interested to hear the consensus around achieving real impact, not just piloting shiny tech. There’s real momentum behind the function’s shift from being viewed as support toward serving as a core strategic partner, especially as AI pushes the boundaries of what’s possible.
That said, everyone agreed that enduring impact will come from leadership, strong governance, and relentless learning. For my team, the big takeaway is that upskilling isn’t optional. Scientific communications professionals who can move fluidly between science, data, and patient advocacy will define the next chapter of our field.
Leaving the symposium, I felt both excited and cautious. The speed of AI’s advance guarantees that next year will look different again, but the real differentiator will be our ability to keep “measuring what matters” as the anchor for everything we do. That means never losing sight of the patients, our colleagues, and ourselves, even as we embrace tools that promise to help us work smarter.
If you want to explore further, I encourage you to check out the MAPS chapter events or drop me a line. I’d love to hear your point of view.
- Rick