About

Diana M. Bowman is a full professor in the Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law, where she serves as the associate dean for international engagement, and is also affiliated with the School for the Future of Innovation in Society. Her research analyzes and informs the development of smarter governance and regulation of innovation to enhance creativity, improve public health, and stimulate deliberation of the ethical, legal, and societal dimensions of emerging technologies. She is a PluS Alliance Fellow (2016-2019), a team member of PlanetWorks in the Julie Ann Wrigley Global Institute of Sustainability, and an Andrew Carnegie Fellow (Class of 2018). Her educational background includes a Ph.D. in Law from Monash University, a GDipLegPrac from The College of Law in Australia, and a B.Sc. in Physiology along with an LLB from Monash University. Her expertise areas include governance of globally oriented institutions, health law and policy, nanotechnology, and public and community health.

Research topics

• Political Science
• Medicine
• Computer Science
• Psychology
• Pharmacology
• Engineering
• Medical education
• Forensic engineering
• Internal medicine
• Chemistry

Selected publications

• Abstract LB024: Pharmacokinetics of a novel viscoelastic suspension of trastuzumab biosimilar for high-concentration, low-volume subcutaneous injection

  Cancer Research · 2023 · 1 citations

  • Pharmacology
  • Medicine
  • Chemistry

  Abstract Background: Xeris Pharmaceuticals (Chicago, IL, USA) has developed the proprietary XeriJect® technology, which uses a novel viscoelastic suspension for delivery of high-concentration, low-volume subcutaneous (SC) injections of therapeutic antibodies. Trastuzumab (TmAb) is a monoclonal antibody that selectively binds and inhibits human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 protein (HER2). It is widely used for the treatment of certain types of breast, stomach, and esophageal cancer, and is commercially available for both intravenous (IV) infusion (Herceptin®, Genentech Inc., South San Francisco, CA, USA) [Herceptin IV] and SC injection (Herceptin Hylecta®, Genentech Inc., South San Francisco, CA, USA) [Hylecta SC]. XeriJect TmAb is a stable formulation of a trastuzumab biosimilar at a higher concentration (432 mg/mL) than Hylecta (120 mg/mL) for SC administration, thus enabling lower injection volumes. This study evaluated and compared XeriJect TmAb SC (120 mg) to Herceptin IV (10 mg/kg) and Hylecta SC (120 mg) in a minipig pharmacokinetic model. Results: Among a total of 12 minipigs, Herceptin was administered IV at 10 mg/kg over a 90-minute infusion and all other formulations were administered at a target dose of 120 mg SC. Due to the higher concentration of XeriJect TmAb, the injection volume of Xeriject TmAb (0.28 mL) was considerably lower than Hylecta (1 mL). XeriJect TmAb was rapidly absorbed similar to Hylecta after SC administration with a median Tmax of 1.0 days with both formulations and a mean Cmax/Dose of 9.7 and 9.5 kg*µg/mL/mg, respectively. In contrast, Herceptin IV produced a median Tmax of 0.06 days and Cmax/Dose of 18.0 kg*µg/mL/mg. All formulations (Herceptin IV, Hylecta SC, XeriJect TmAb SC) demonstrated similar elimination profiles and exposure as assessed by AUClast/Dose. The mean [SD] AUClast/Dose of XeriJect TmAb (108 [4.2] day*kg*µg/mL/mg) was similar to Hylecta SC (109 [22.4] day*kg*µg/mL/mg) and Herceptin IV (97 [7.5] day*kg*µg/mL/mg). The mean [SD] elimination half-life of XeriJect® TmAb SC (11.4 [10.1] days) was also similar to Hylecta® SC (11.3 [4.8] days) and longer than with Herceptin® IV (8.8 [2.1] days). Conclusion: We have demonstrated for the first time that administration of XeriJect TmAb, a stable high-concentration formulation of trastuzumab administered SC, produced rapid absorption and similar pharmacokinetics to commercially available Herceptin IV and Hylecta SC in a preclinical pharmacokinetic model. Citation Format: Rick Fitch, Diana Bowman, Martin Donovan, Steven Prestrelski. Pharmacokinetics of a novel viscoelastic suspension of trastuzumab biosimilar for high-concentration, low-volume subcutaneous injection [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 2 (Clinical Trials and Late-Breaking Research); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(8_Suppl):Abstract nr LB024.

  PublisherDOI

• Disputes over when life begins may block cutting-edge reproductive technologies like mitochondrial replacement therapies

  2020-10-22

  preprintSenior author
  PublisherDOI

• Enhanced Crash Investigation Study (ECIS): Report 1: Overview and Analysis of Crash Types, Injury Outcomes and Contributing Factors

  2020 · 2 citations

  • Computer Science
  • Forensic engineering
  • Computer Science
  Publisher

• Students Experiencing Homelessness

  Oxford University Press eBooks · 2020 · 1 citations

  1st authorCorresponding
  • Political Science
  • Psychology
  • Medical education

  Children and youth who experience homelessness are among the most vulnerable and invisible of at-risk students. Poor academic performance and low graduation rates result from school mobility, unmet basic needs, poor health, and trauma. Teachers can mitigate the impacts of homelessness on students by making the most of the brief time a homeless student may be in their classroom, being an accessible and caring adult in the child’s or youth’s life, and working with the school district’s homeless liaison to connect the child or youth to supports both in the school and in the community. Teachers should be familiar with the McKinney-Vento Act, which is federal legislation that ensures that schools and school districts remove barriers to the education of students experiencing homelessness. Services may include tutoring, transportation, free meals, and counseling. Schools can be a haven for safety, normalcy, and hope for children and youth who experience homelessness.

  PublisherDOI

• Smoke that Thunders: Risk, Confusion and Regulatory Frameworks

  2019-10-10

  book-chapter1st authorCorresponding

  Known to locals as “Mosi-oa-Tunya”, the 1855 ‘iscovery’of a formidable waterfall in the Zambezi River by Dr David Livingstone represented a significant milestone in history. The since re-labelled “Victoria Falls” - with its awesome force and thick ‘smoke’ - symbolised a new frontier for European explorers. Nanotechnologies are rapidly being incorporated into production processes and products across a range of industry sectors. Despite the economic potential and promised benefits of the technology, there is an increasing body of scientific literature that suggests that some nanomaterials may, by virtue of the novel physico-chemical properties that appear at the nanoscale, pose a risk to human and environmental health under certain conditions. In light of the anticipated economic benefits associated with nanotechnologies across the entire value chain it is unsurprising the European Union has continued to show leadership in its investment in research and development activities.

  PublisherDOI

• Assessing the Impact of a ‘For Government' Review on the Nanotechnology Regulatory Landscape

  Open MIND · 2019-01-01

  articleOpen access1st authorCorresponding

  A number of jurisdictions have now completed reviews of the regulatory issues raised by nanotechnologies. Chronologically, these reviews have moved from treating nanotechnologies as a narrow matter of chemical regulation to a broader perspective that considers both the technology’s impact on end-products such as foods and cosmetics as well as the endof-life issues raised by such products. While the exact nature and focus of these reviews have varied, there is increasing specifi city in their analysis and outcomes. Australia was one of the fi rst jurisdictions to initiate a wide-ranging and independent review of its regulatory frameworks to deal with the potential human and environmental health and safety risks posed by nanotechnologies. It has been fi ve years since the report was handed to the Australian Government.1 The aim of this article is to critically assess the impact of the regulatory review on the federal government’s policy on nanotechnologies. In doing so, this article outlines regulatory developments that have occurred since the report’s publication. Particular attention is given to examining the activities that have occurred within the regulatory agencies identifi ed within the report. The broader policy and regulatory landscape for nanotechnologies in Australia is also considered. This article is both timely and relevant due to current efforts by other jurisdictions to complete their own regulatory reviews. It articulates the impact of one regulatory review on policy developments within Australia, and discusses possible reasons for the domestic responses to that review.

  OA PDFDOI

• Assessing the Impact of a ‘For Government' Review on the Nanotechnology Regulatory Landscape

  Monash University · 2019-01-01

  articleOpen access1st authorCorresponding

  A number of jurisdictions have now completed reviews of the regulatory issues raised by nanotechnologies. Chronologically, these reviews have moved from treating nanotechnologies as a narrow matter of chemical regulation to a broader perspective that considers both the technology’s impact on end-products such as foods and cosmetics as well as the endof-life issues raised by such products. While the exact nature and focus of these reviews have varied, there is increasing specifi city in their analysis and outcomes. Australia was one of the fi rst jurisdictions to initiate a wide-ranging and independent review of its regulatory frameworks to deal with the potential human and environmental health and safety risks posed by nanotechnologies. It has been fi ve years since the report was handed to the Australian Government.1 The aim of this article is to critically assess the impact of the regulatory review on the federal government’s policy on nanotechnologies. In doing so, this article outlines regulatory developments that have occurred since the report’s publication. Particular attention is given to examining the activities that have occurred within the regulatory agencies identifi ed within the report. The broader policy and regulatory landscape for nanotechnologies in Australia is also considered. This article is both timely and relevant due to current efforts by other jurisdictions to complete their own regulatory reviews. It articulates the impact of one regulatory review on policy developments within Australia, and discusses possible reasons for the domestic responses to that review.

  PublisherDOI

• Assessing the Impact of a ‘For Government' Review on the Nanotechnology Regulatory Landscape

  Figshare · 2019-10-29 · 7 citations

  articleOpen access1st authorCorresponding

  A number of jurisdictions have now completed reviews of the regulatory issues raised by nanotechnologies. Chronologically, these reviews have moved from treating nanotechnologies as a narrow matter of chemical regulation to a broader perspective that considers both the technology’s impact on end-products such as foods and cosmetics as well as the endof-life issues raised by such products. While the exact nature and focus of these reviews have varied, there is increasing specifi city in their analysis and outcomes. Australia was one of the fi rst jurisdictions to initiate a wide-ranging and independent review of its regulatory frameworks to deal with the potential human and environmental health and safety risks posed by nanotechnologies. It has been fi ve years since the report was handed to the Australian Government.1 The aim of this article is to critically assess the impact of the regulatory review on the federal government’s policy on nanotechnologies. In doing so, this article outlines regulatory developments that have occurred since the report’s publication. Particular attention is given to examining the activities that have occurred within the regulatory agencies identifi ed within the report. The broader policy and regulatory landscape for nanotechnologies in Australia is also considered. This article is both timely and relevant due to current efforts by other jurisdictions to complete their own regulatory reviews. It articulates the impact of one regulatory review on policy developments within Australia, and discusses possible reasons for the domestic responses to that review.

  OA PDFDOI

• Evaluation of alternative intersection treatments at rural crossroads using simulation software

  Traffic Injury Prevention · 2018-12-17 · 7 citations

  articleOpen access

  OBJECTIVE: Rural roads are characterized by hazardous roadsides and suboptimal geometry yet allow for high travel speeds and unfavorable impact angles. In Victoria, 25% of persons seriously injured and 52% of fatalities occur on rural roads, with 30% occurring at intersections. In the United States, almost twice the number of traffic fatalities occur in rural areas than in urban areas, while accounting for less than half of all vehicle miles traveled and 21% of the population. The choice of safety countermeasure is therefore paramount. Simulation software provides a cost-effective means of analyzing alternative intersection treatments with a view to identifying their effectiveness in mitigating crashes. The aim of this research was to assess the safety benefits of 4 alternative intersection treatments using in-depth crash data with an advanced crash reconstruction process. METHOD: Using a single serious injury real-world crash from the Monash University Accident Research Centre Enhanced Crash Investigation Study and crash reconstruction software, an exemplar rural crash was reconstructed and validated against real-world data. The crash involved a passenger vehicle (European New Car Assessment Programme 5-star) approaching from a minor road and failing to yield at a give-way sign; the posted speed limit was 80 km/h. The vehicle was struck on the right/driver side by a rigid truck (B-vehicle; 1990) traveling on the major approach (100 km/h). The driver of the case vehicle was seriously injured. Four alternative intersection treatments appropriate for the crash site were constructed in computer-aided design software (Rhinoceros Ver. 5): roundabout; rumble strips; a reduced speed limit; and the combination of lower speed limit and rumbles to determine the reduction in crash forces in the presence of the countermeasures. RESULTS: The hypothetical scenarios demonstrate substantial reductions in impact force and different points of impact, resulting in a significantly lower injury severity for the struck driver. Speed limit reduction to 80 km/h on the main approach (from 100 km/h) in combination with rumble strips on both intersection approaches had the most favorable outcome with the crash avoided entirely, assuming speed compliance. DISCUSSION: The findings have implications for understanding the role of speed in crashes and hence the design of effective countermeasures. Simulation software, validated using real-world data, provides a cost-effective means of evaluating alternative intersection treatments for rural intersections. Scaled up, implementing these treatments would have significant safety benefits and reduce the road trauma currently associated with rural roads.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• Robots and Socio-Ethical Implications [Guest Editorial]

  IEEE Technology and Society Magazine · 2018-03-01 · 4 citations

  article

  The articles in this special section focus on the social implications of robotics and artificial intelligence. From lifelike androids to virtual assistants, industrial machines to drones, today’s robot creations, including those in automation, are used to perform any number of specific tasks. These undertakings are repetitive in nature and suggest that we are still a long way from manufacturing “all-purpose” utility robots. History teaches us much about technological innovation and the perils of over-promising.

  PublisherDOI

Frequent coauthors

• Graeme Hodge

  Monash University

  19 shared

• Geert Van Calster

  13 shared

• Andrew Maynard

  University of Queensland

  13 shared

• Kenneth W. Abbott

  Arizona State University

  9 shared

• Willard Pedrick

  Arizona State University

  9 shared

• Robert Aitken

  9 shared

• Michael Fitzharris

  Monash University

  7 shared

• Joel D’Silva

  5 shared

Education

• Other

  Monash University

  2003

• B.S., Physiology

  Monash University

  2003

• Ph.D., Law

  Monash University

  2007

• Other

  The College of Law, Australia

  2011

Awards & honors

• PluS Alliance Fellow (2016-2019)
• Andrew Carnegie Fellow (Class of 2018)
• John D. Thompson Prize for Young Investigators (2013)
• Michigan Road Scholars Program (2012)
• King’s College London-Monash University Fellowship (2008)