In this latest edition of our Career Perspectives series, we had the pleasure of speaking with Victor Laliman-Khara, Research Principal at Cytel. Victor shares his journey from a background in biostatistics and health economics to a career focused on comparative effectiveness within health research. In this interview, he shares his passion for data-driven decision-making in healthcare, discusses the evolving landscape of analytical methodologies, and reflects on how flexibility in work has shaped both his professional and personal life.

Can you give us a little background on your career so far? What inspired you to pursue a degree as a statistical engineer and how did that lead to a career as a research analyst in health economics?

I am originally from France, where I earned a degree in biostatistics and health economics. Before that, I completed prépas, an intense two-year program focused on mathematics, physics, and robotics, where I discovered my keen interest in statistics. This led me to join ENSAI, a French school specializing in statistics.

During my studies, I had the opportunity to interview with a pharmaceutical company, where I was first introduced to the world of clinical trials and their real-world applications. I became incredibly passionate about the field — seeing how the design of an experiment could lead to groundbreaking treatments that truly change patients’ lives. However, I also recognized the critical importance of integrity and scientific rigor in ensuring we make the right decisions.

In my final year at ENSAI, I realized that health economics was the perfect fit for me. It allowed me to work closely on clinical trials, focusing on understanding patient populations while also exploring market dynamics through indirect treatment comparisons (ITCs). I found it incredibly fulfilling to not only meet efficacy thresholds but also to define a treatment’s place in the market, identify target prescription populations, and guide clients through the rigorous HTA process.

I spent five years in consulting, moving from France to London and then to Toronto in 2016 — a city that was rapidly growing in innovation and technology. From there, I transitioned to pharma, joining Roche for three years to gain firsthand experience in designing clinical trials, particularly adaptive trial designs.

Then the pandemic hit. For the first time in my career, I had to pivot entirely to remote work. At the end of the pandemic and with the return to work, I realize that my situation had changed, with my son being born in the pandemic and having found it easier to balance work-life with remote work, I realized the new way of working was what I was looking for. I also missed the HTA work and ITCs. So I explored companies dedicated to this model and in the space of consulting and HTAs, and that’s when Cytel caught my attention. Even better, they had an open position in the EVA department, where I could once again work on ITCs, strategic advising, and HTA submissions. That’s how I ended up here, and I’ve been enjoying myself ever since.

What do you like best about your role, and about working at Cytel?

I appreciate the diversity of projects we work on at Cytel and the numerous opportunities to collaborate across project teams. Recently, I was involved in a multi-team project where I had the chance to work alongside the Systematic Literature Review (SLR) and Comparative Effectiveness (CE) teams. This experience has been particularly exciting, as it allows me to see the full process — from evidence generation (SLR) to synthesis (my work) and its application in modeling (Health Economics, HE). Working on such projects is highly engaging as it provides the opportunity to collaborate with experts from different fields and discuss the best strategic approaches.

Additionally, Cytel’s flexible hours policy is ideal for both my work and personal life, allowing me to balance professional commitments with family responsibilities. With my wife working as a doctor in a remote area of Northern Manitoba and my little four-year-old at home, this flexibility is invaluable.

Your work involves advanced Indirect Treatment Comparisons (ITC) analytical techniques — could you walk us through some of the key methodologies you specialize in and their impact on clinical research?

ITC is a broad term that encompasses various methods used to better understand a product’s comparative effectiveness against others. Including all available treatments in a clinical trial is often not feasible, which is where ITCs provide value. They offer a methodological framework for conducting comparisons between all available treatments, accompanied by a thorough review of the risk of bias in such comparisons. The goal is to provide a comprehensive overview of how different treatments are performing, and direct comparisons between them, benefiting health review bodies, physicians, and researchers alike.

Having this summary also helps to identify populations with unmet needs, uncovering areas where specific subgroups may have lower treatment performance or where evidence (such as clinical trials) may be lacking for certain therapeutic options.

On a personal note, I’ve seen my wife, a doctor, discuss ITC results in osteoporosis at her university hospital, underscoring how critical this type of work is in guiding physicians to better understand their therapeutic options when supporting patients. Unfortunately, it wasn’t my research, though!

Given how fast analytics and data science evolve, how do you stay up to date with new methodologies and industry best practices? Are there particular resources, strategies, or mentors you rely on?

First, it’s important to recognize that the pharmaceutical industry, particularly health outcomes research, is an area where data science and the methodologies we apply are evolving at a rapid pace. The way we conduct comparative effectiveness and ITC now is vastly different from when I started my career. I’m a firm believer in self-learning to stay at the forefront of these changes. Thanks to platforms like LinkedIn, PubMed, and various conferences, there are always opportunities to discover new methodologies and engage in discussions to learn from others in the industry. By actively participating in these communities and keeping an open mind, I’ve managed to keep myself up to date with the latest developments — or at least, I hope so.

You’ve been deepening your expertise in machine learning (Python & R) and RShiny. How do you see these tools shaping the future of Comparative Effectiveness research?

Clinical research is advancing through tools like RShiny and machine learning, revolutionizing the field. Historically, there was often a significant delay between evidence generation (data collection) and evidence synthesis (such as ITCs and trial summaries). However, these new tools are helping to bridge that gap, bringing us closer to real-time evidence synthesis. For example, RShiny allows us to explore different model specifications in real-time and assess their impact on ITCs, providing a framework to build dynamic dashboards. Machine learning is also enhancing our capabilities in SLRs, significantly reducing the time required to locate relevant publications and extract key information.

Despite these advancements, challenges remain. For instance, generative AI tends to produce “hallucinations,” making the output occasionally unreliable, and RShiny demands substantial upfront work. However, I am confident that these issues can be overcome, and such tools will ultimately shape the future of comparative effectiveness.

What makes Comparative Effectiveness so important, and how does it influence clinical research outcomes?

In my view, comparative effectiveness is a critical component of health research, alongside clinical trials and health economics modeling. Without this component, understanding the full range of treatment options becomes challenging, often leading to qualitative choices rather than evidence-based decisions. As research and increasing life expectancy have demonstrated, evidence-based decision-making is essential — not only to make the right choice but to do so consistently. In this context, comparative effectiveness provides valuable insights by helping us understand how treatments rank, identify the most appropriate treatment strategies based on patient characteristics, and model the costs and opportunities of new treatments. This enables the development of sustainable healthcare strategies that are grounded in replicable science, rather than individual decisions, and ensures that clinical research can effectively translate into real-world applications.

Could you share a project you have worked on that you feel particularly proud of, and why?

This is particularly challenging for me to answer, as I take great pride in many of the projects I have worked on. However, one project that stands out is our recent work on Multilevel Network Meta-Regression (ML NMR) in an indication that is still in its early stages. The unique aspect of using the ML NMR approach was its ability to provide deeper insights into how different treatments’ efficacy are affected based on their baseline characteristics. Given that this disease area is still emerging, there is a significant unmet need among patients, and it was crucial for us to understand how their baseline traits might influence the effectiveness of various treatment options, especially as different treatment classes are available for it.

Through this work, we were able to identify specific subgroups of patients who would benefit most from certain treatments, while suggesting alternative treatment classes for others. Our client was exceptional in their commitment — not only did they want to understand the comparative effectiveness of their product, but they also collaborated closely with the academic community to ensure that the guidelines evolved to reflect their new findings. Despite the complex methodology involved, the insights we gained were invaluable. Collaborating with the client to enhance guidelines and support their product is a source of immense pride for me. It also highlights the high caliber of clients that Cytel is privileged to work with.

As a remote employee, how do you maintain a healthy work-life balance? What strategies work for you, and do you feel supported by Cytel in this regard?

First, I think it’s important to define what a healthy work-life balance means for me. I am passionate about my work, but I also live in the great north, where nature can be unpredictable. For me, a healthy work-life balance means maintaining a productive day while also being present for my family when needed. For example, I want to be available if my child needs to come home early due to a snowstorm. If my wife needs to travel to a nearby community due to an outbreak or to help manage the aftermath of a wildfire, I want the flexibility to travel to her over the weekend.

In this context, Cytel provides many options to help maintain a work-life balance, offering flexible work hours and a management team that listens. For instance, I can block time to pick up my child or adjust my schedule to finish early on Fridays if I need to travel. This flexibility has truly helped me balance my family and professional life. Additionally, I make sure to have a dedicated workspace, which allows me to quickly get back into work mode and stay focused.

What are your main interests outside of work?

I have been a traveler for many years, having left my parents’ house to study very early and never settled in one place for more than five years ever since. As a result, I have always been passionate about discovering the cultures of the places I’ve lived in. You can often find me spending a lot of time in museums — especially now that my child can handle longer visits.

Beyond that, I am also deeply interested in supporting the communities I’ve been a part of. This has led me to actively participate in local clean-up initiatives, social events for the elderly, and various activities that allow me to give back to the communities that have welcomed me.

Finally, what’s one piece of career advice you wish you had received earlier?

The piece of advice I was given was, “You work to live, not live to work.” Most people misinterpret this as saying we shouldn’t be excited about our work. However, as my manager explained to me, it’s perfectly fine to be passionate about work but we should also take time to live, whether that means resting, pursuing hobbies, or spending time with family. Work will always be there; new projects and opportunities will come. By cultivating balance, we can excel and build a long, sustainable career by learning to manage all aspects of life effectively.

Thank you, Victor, for sharing your experience!

Share Via