Alumni Spotlight: Corrin Wohlhieter, Ph.D., '21 (Pharmacology, Rudin Lab)

What stood out to you about the program at Weill Cornell?

Three things led me to choosing Weill Cornell. 

1. Location. New York City is an incredible place to live. Having so much outside of the lab that I could do in the city kept me going during the challenging times in my PhD program. 
2. Tri-Institutional network: Not only are you joining Weill Cornell, but you also have the opportunity to attend seminars at Rockefeller, do your lab at Sloan Kettering, etc. Those types of flexible options were intriguing to me as someone who didn’t come into the program with a set path. I wanted to be able to explore multiple options and I took advantage of the opportunities that being here offered. 
3. Reputation: I knew Weill Cornell as a medical school, but when I looked into the Pharmacology program, it really checked a lot of boxes for me. Knowing that having a PhD from Weill Cornell was going to be recognized by colleagues and future employers was the final nudge for me. Everyone I met during the interview process – the staff, the professors – was so supportive, seemed great to work with, and really cared about the students. 

What was your experience with your first attempt at your thesis?

My research was focused on non-small cell lung cancer. When I first joined the lab, I had a project where I was building a tool to help us identify new receptors. I spent three years trying to build that tool, and it never worked. I actually had to make a decision, going into my fourth year, as to whether I would start over or leave the program. 

It was a challenging decision, but everything I was doing outside of the lab helped me to feel confident enough to continue in the program. I ended up scrapping my project, made new models, focused on new questions, had a new thesis committee, at Year 4. 

What was your second attempt? 

At the time, there was a finding of two mutations: if a patient with non-small cell lung cancer had these two mutations, they had a significantly worse prognosis. But we didn’t know what it was about these mutations that made patients have a worse response to standard of care. 

By using Sloan Kettering’s mutational profiling database of patient samples to define my thesis question and creating representative cell line models, I did a CRISPR screening to identify what it was about these mutations that was helping the cells thrive. With the foundation I had built in the lab already, and the skillset I had accrued, I was able to turn that project around in two years, publish it, and graduate. It was a good lesson that sometimes things are not going to work out, but that shouldn’t dictate your entire experience. 

What encouraged you to stay in the program, even in the face of that project failing? 

I was very involved in a lot of extracurriculars outside of lab in activities adjacent to my PhD. In my first year, I joined the executive council as their career liaison. Later on, I joined the Tri-I Biotech Club as the communications coordinator. In that role, I was leading and hosting events with alumni and professionals in New York City, who had different careers in the life sciences space. By my fourth year in the club, I was president and growing my network. 

I had also joined GRO Biotech, which is a consortium of New York City PhD students across institutions like NYU, Mount Sinai, Weill Cornell, etc, and the consulting club. 

What was the impact of your extracurriculars on your decision to stay in the program?

The network I had built, as well as knowing all the career opportunities I could have with a PhD and how many doors it would open, helped me to make the decision to start over and keep going. I knew that this was a decision that would impact me for the rest of my life. If I finished my PhD, I would have that forever, but if I quit, I would never go back. 

When lab work wasn’t working out the way I expected, it gave me the perspective to continue. 

Do you have a favorite memory of being in graduate school? 

Two come to mind. One was when I was in GRO Biotech. We held a huge symposium with hundreds of students around New York City who wanted to explore different careers. We brought in different professionals to speak and present. I was on stage at one point, facilitating the symposium, and it was very gratifying to realize all of the legwork I had done to get to this point. I felt like I was doing my PhD the right way, giving myself opportunities that weren’t handed to me. 

The other was my thesis defense during COVID. It’s the best feeling ever to defend, because you can look back at all of the times things weren’t working. How many times in your life do you get to fail, fail, and fail, before you ultimately achieve? There are so few opportunities to hit such a milestone, and it’s incredible when you get to that point in your PhD. 

How did you prepare for the transition between your PhD and your first role? 

Around my fourth year, having been involved in so many extracurricular activities, I had decided that I was not likely to stay in the academic sphere, but that I wanted to use my PhD in any future role, and industry was an interesting space for me. 

There weren’t many resources available in the graduate school that focused on industry jobs, so I went to the pharmacology program leadership and asked if we could put on a course specifically about industry. We ended up starting a course in collaboration with Roche. Every single class featured a person with a different function within industry. They would talk to us about their jobs, how a PhD helped them in their role, etc, and it opened my eyes to all of the different opportunities within industry. 

I was not really aware of how many different roles there were in industry and how many different levels of industry existed: biotech, large pharma, small pharma, vendors, etc. You can do creative work, writing, researching, investing, strategy – all of these doors are open when you have an advanced degree. 

What has been your career journey post-PhD? 

After I graduated, I decided to go into consulting. I knew it was a strong stepping stone to industry and would expose me to a lot of different functions in industry through various projects. I used the consulting club’s resources to prepare for my consulting interviews, to learn which consulting firms were hiring PhDs and why, and ultimately chose to join a boutique firm that had specialized in life science strategy and had an oncology team. I liked this firm because of their smaller size which gave early career consultants a lot of opportunity to be client-facing early on. Those clients were the same industry leaders I one day wanted to be.

In my consulting role, I had the opportunity to specialize in oncology, which is the space I had done my PhD in. I knew I wanted to work in oncology long-term, so I specialized in oncology projects, working with start-ups all the way up to large pharma. 

I landed my first role in industry as the competitive intelligence lead for various tumors, and in that position, I was able to understand the matrix organization of a large pharma company even better. As I learned more about the different functions that have to work together to get drugs to market and to get doctors to use them, patients to understand them, etc, I ultimately felt that the medical affairs function was the right fit for me. Through my network at the company and my experiences, I was able to move into the medical affairs team. That’s where I sit today, working in GI cancers. 

What advice would you give current students about developing soft skills (networking, talking about science, how to collaborate, etc) in addition to a strong scientific portfolio?

No matter what career you’re in, having a skillset in networking is so important. Even in academia, faculty have to collaborate with each other and share funding and resources. That type of collaboration often happens by attending conferences or consortium meetings, where you need to be able to talk to people about their science, or talk about your interests, in order to get any collaboration started. 

In industry, it’s important, especially when working in large companies. Being able to approach people and ask interesting questions, spark conversation, and build relationships is critical. 

I would recommend taking advantage of some of the events at WCGS and MSK focused on networking, optimizing your LinkedIn, how to write appropriate emails, public speaking, etc. 

The science you’re pursuing is important but if you can’t communicate it properly or spark conversation about it, then it doesn’t go very far. 

What would you advise prospective students to be considering as they weigh different programs? 

You have to talk to current students. If they’re enthusiastic about telling you their experience, and excited to share all of the resources and opportunities their school offers, that’s a good sign. 

If you’re someone who doesn’t have a concrete plan for how they want to use a PhD, you want to join a school that has a lot of opportunity to explore and supports exploration. Some schools are reticent to support students in exploring things outside of the lab, but Cornell was the total opposite. They encourage students to do just that. 

Consider location as well. You want to be happy when you’re not in the lab.