The ECO2025 Public Engagement & Science Communication Prize, launched this year at the 32nd European Congress on Obesity in Málaga, Spain, recognised two early career researchers who actively engaged people living with obesity, the general public, policymakers, and professional communities in conversations that have influenced research, health policy and practice. We spoke with one of this year’s winners, Dr Matthew Harris, a PhD researcher and medical doctor at the Manchester Cancer Research Centre (UK), recognised for his outstanding work on the PADRAIC project – a large-scale international consensus process co-designed with patients to explore how intentional weight loss could be tested as a strategy to prevent obesity-related cancers.
Welcome, Matthew! Please give a brief introduction to your work.
Firstly, thank you so much for the recognition for our work on obesity and cancer. Having established that obesity is a key risk factor for cancer, the second most common across most of the world, we wanted to understand potential targeted prevention strategies. We realised that a clinical trial will be the most likely strategy to inform clinical practice and policy change, however a trial in this space would be very complex, costly and will require a long duration. We realised that one way to progress the field forward, given the complexity of the field and quickly changing pace due to new obesity management medications, was to bring multi-disciplinary experts together in an expert consensus.
Why was a consensus process the right method for this research question, and how did integrating patient voices shape the project?
Given the wide degree of uncertainty in this research area and broad range of possible options for evidence generation, we realised that an expert consensus would be an effective way of highlighting whether a clinical trial was needed, what kind of trial would be preferable and where the research priorities were.
We wanted to ensure that the expert group were thoroughly informed by patient voices and held multiple focus groups, plus had a patient consensus advisor who joined our steering committee and expert meetings. The lived experience was integral to decision making around statements to be included in the Delphi and we made sure that these experiences were heard in our group meetings to help to inform opinion.
Can you give an example of a specific recommendation that was directly influenced by patient input?
Our patient groups informed our entire consensus process. Specifically, they highlighted the possible ethical challenges around a placebo controlled GLP-1 trial and potential acceptable alternatives to this.
How did working with Obesity Voices and Vocal help you reach diverse communities?
Obesity Voices and Vocal are two distinct PPIE specialist groups in different parts of the countries. They are fantastic as we are able to recruit for a blend of experience and diversity in each panel. For example, we were able to recruit patients from different ethnic backgrounds, different experiences of cancer and different age groups. Partnering with two separate organisations, in two different cities, helped us to ensure we continued to hear the voices of a diverse patient population.
Your work has potential to shape future clinical trials. What comes next in the PADRAIC project?
Since completing this project we have designed In-Silico simulation of clinical trials informed by our consensus. These simulations have helped us understand the feasibility of a large-scale cancer prevention clinical trial. We have brought together a group of expert researchers, funders, policy-makers and industry to make steps towards designing a real world trial. We hope that our PADRAIC project will help to define the evidence generation landscape for obesity-related cancer prevention.
How do you hope your approach will influence the wider research community?
We hope that including patients throughout our consensus and trial feasibility assessment process will set an example of the importance of having those with lived experience involved who can shape the outcomes. We realise that in order to plan an optimised clinical trial, it must be heavily informed by those who will participate in the trial and ultimately how any results may directly influence.
I am very grateful for the generous prize grant and look forward to attending ECO2026 to present more of our work. I plan to use the grant to attend further training on how to include diverse patient and public engagement into my research.
- Group photos: Matthew Harris & research team
- Second photo: Matthew Harris & Ken Clare, patient consensus advisor
Eli Lilly & Company provided funding for the prize but had no role in the prize selection process or future direction of the winners’ work.