Cuts to high-profile NIH efforts leave researchers reeling

Jocelyn Kaiser

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adq1773

IF: 56.9

2024-05-03

Science

Abstract:Drop in 21st Century Cures Act funding will slow BRAIN and All of Us projects

multidisciplinary sciences

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

NIH's flat budget for 2024 will force 'very difficult decisions'

Jocelyn Kaiser

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adp4709

IF: 56.9

2024-03-30

Science

Abstract:Belated Senate and House compromise eliminates policy riders restricting certain studies

multidisciplinary sciences
Major biomedical funder NIH poised for massive reform under Trump 2.0

Max Kozlov

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-03736-0

IF: 64.8

2024-11-18

Nature

Abstract:Sweeping changes and more research scrutiny could be on the way for the US National Institutes of Health. Sweeping changes and more research scrutiny could be on the way for the US National Institutes of Health.

multidisciplinary sciences
U.S. blocks funding for pandemic research group

Jocelyn Kaiser

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adq5967

IF: 56.9

2024-05-25

Science

Abstract:EcoHealth Alliance mishandled grant that helped fund virus studies in China, officials say

multidisciplinary sciences
Evolution of priorities in strategic funding for collaborative health research. A comparison of the European Union Framework Programmes to the program funding by the United States National Institutes of Health

David Fajardo-Ortiz,Bart Thijs,Wolfgang Glanzel,Karin R. Sipido

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2308.07162

2023-08-14

Digital Libraries

Abstract:The historical research-funding model, based on the curiosity and academic interests of researchers, is giving way to new strategic funding models that seek to meet societal needs. We investigated the impact of this trend on health research funded by the two leading funding bodies worldwide, i.e. the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in the United States, and the framework programs of the European Union (EU). To this end, we performed a quantitative analysis of the content of projects supported through programmatic funding by the EU and NIH, in the period 2008-2014 and 2015-2020. We used machine learning for classification of projects as basic biomedical research, or as more implementation directed clinical therapeutic research, diagnostics research, population research, or policy and management research. In addition, we analyzed funding for major disease areas (cancer, cardio-metabolic and infectious disease). We found that EU collaborative health research projects clearly shifted towards more implementation research. In the US, the recently implemented UM1 program has a similar profile with strong clinical therapeutic research, while other NIH programs remain heavily oriented to basic biomedical research. Funding for cancer research is present across all NIH and EU programs, and in biomedical as well as more implementation directed projects, while infectious diseases is an emerging theme. We conclude that demand for solutions for medical needs leads to expanded funding for implementation- and impact-oriented research. Basic biomedical research remains present in programs driven by scientific initiative and strategies based on excellence, but may be at risk of declining funding opportunities.
A crisis in clinical research

David S Hong,Patricia LoRusso,Mario Sznol

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/jitc-2023-008520

IF: 12.469

2024-07-01

Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer

Abstract:The clinical research pipeline is critical to ensuring continued development of novel treatments that can offer patients with cancer safe and effective options. Unfortunately, progress has slowed since the COVID-19 pandemic due to uncovered, systemic inefficiencies across critical processes. Towards initiating discussion on how to reinvigorate clinical research, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) hosted a virtual summit that characterized issues and formed potential solutions. This commentary serves to highlight the crisis facing clinical research as well as stimulate field-wide discussion on how to better serve patients into the future.

oncology,immunology
Once reluctant, new NIH chief Monica Bertagnolli embraces role

Jocelyn Kaiser

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adn8381

IF: 56.9

2024-01-05

Science

Abstract:Improving patient care is top priority for head of world's largest biomedical research funder

multidisciplinary sciences
Bill targeting Chinese firms worries U.S. researchers

Robert F. Service

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adt2248

IF: 56.9

2024-09-21

Science

Abstract:Biosecure Act could hinder science collaborations, limit sequencer purchases

multidisciplinary sciences
Scientific Talent Leaks Out of Funding Gaps

Wei Yang Tham,Joseph Staudt,Elisabeth Ruth Perlman,Stephanie D. Cheng

2024-02-12

Abstract:We study how delays in NIH grant funding affect the career outcomes of research personnel. Using comprehensive earnings and tax records linked to university transaction data along with a difference-in-differences design, we find that a funding interruption of more than 30 days has a substantial effect on job placements for personnel who work in labs with a single NIH R01 research grant, including a 3 percentage point (40%) increase in the probability of not working in the US. Incorporating information from the full 2020 Decennial Census and data on publications, we find that about half of those induced into nonemployment appear to permanently leave the US and are 90% less likely to publish in a given year, with even larger impacts for trainees (postdocs and graduate students). Among personnel who continue to work in the US, we find that interrupted personnel earn 20% less than their continuously-funded peers, with the largest declines concentrated among trainees and other non-faculty personnel (such as staff and undergraduates). Overall, funding delays account for about 5% of US nonemployment in our data, indicating that they have a meaningful effect on the scientific labor force at the national level.

General Economics
An evaluation of programs to support new investigators at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases: Striking a balance with funding for established investigators

Ariel C Zane,James Onken,Marie B Parker,Dolan Ghosh

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2022.102218

Abstract:As the largest funder of basic biomedical research in the US, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has an interest in maintaining a sustainable, productive workforce of investigators. Over the years, NIH has implemented several programs to attract early-stage investigators and other applicants without prior NIH support. The latest of these is the Next Generation Researchers Initiative. These programs have been shown to be successful in meeting NIH-wide goals but their success for any particular NIH institute or center (IC), and in any particular year, is determined by a variety of factors, some extrinsic to an IC's funding decision process. Each IC must balance support for new investigators with funding for productive ongoing programs of research. We examine historical trends in support of new investigators at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) over a 22-year period, as well as trends in some major extrinsic influences on that support. The results indicate that NIH's new investigator programs have succeeded in maintaining a balance between the support for new NIAID investigators while also continuing to support an expanded pool of established investigators. The programs have been particularly effective in providing support to early-stage investigators.
Analysis of National Institutes of Health Funding for the COVID-19 Pandemic

Adishesh K Narahari,Taylor M Horgan,Anirudha S Chandrabhatla,D Chris Gist,Paranjay D Patel,Mark A Lantieri,Jeffrey M Sturek,Claire L Davis,Patrick E H Jackson,Taison D Bell

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofae064

2024-02-29

Open Forum Infectious Diseases

Abstract:Abstract Background Evaluating the National Institute’s Health’s (NIH's) response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic via grants and clinical trials is crucial to determining the impact they had on aiding US citizens. We determined how the NIH's funding for COVID-19 research was disbursed and used by various institutions across the United States. Methods We queried NIH RePORTER and isolated COVID-19–related grants from January 2020 to December 2021. We analyzed grant type, geographical location, and awardee institution. Manuscripts published from these grants were quantitatively analyzed. COVID-19 clinical trials were mapped and distances from counties to clinical trial sites were calculated using ArcGis. Results A total of 2401 COVID-19 NIH grants resulted in 14 654 manuscripts from $4.2 billion and generated more than 150 000 citations. R01s make up 32% of grants (763/2401) and 8% of funding ($329 million). UM1 grants account for the majority of funding (30.8%; $1.3 Billion). Five states received 50.6% of funding: North Carolina, Washington, New York, California, and Massachusetts. Finally, of the 1806 clinical trials across 1266 sites in the United States, the majority were in metropolitan areas in close proximity to areas of high COVID-19 disease burden. Conclusions and Relevance Evaluating the outcome of the NIH's response to the COVID-19 pandemic is of interest to the general public. The present study finds that the NIH disbursed more than $4 billion in funding to large consortiums and clinical trials to develop diagnostics, therapeutics, and vaccines. Approximately 8% of funding was used for R01 grants. Clinical trial sites were generally located in areas of high COVID-19 burden.

immunology,infectious diseases,microbiology
Large Publication Gap for Gynecologic Cancers in High–Impact Factor Journals

Nikita Sinha,Amanda McDonald,Danika Barry,Emma L. Barber

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/aog.0000000000005301

2023-08-23

Obstetrics and Gynecology

Abstract:The Cancer Moonshot Initiative was reignited in 2022 to accelerate the rate of progress against cancer. 1 This ambitious research and policy initiative was originally announced in 2016, authorizing $1.8 billion in funding for cancer research over the subsequent 7 years. 1 Despite these increases in the National Cancer Institute (NCI) research budget, the NCI has seen a consistent decrease in its budget when inflation-adjusted dollars are used. 2 This stagnant funding makes it difficult to maintain the pace of scientific discovery and to continue progress against cancer, which can be seen in the substantial decrease in new research proposals funded and number of fully funded National Institutes of Health studies. 3

obstetrics & gynecology
Evolution of funding for collaborative health research towards higher-level patient-oriented research. A comparison of the European Union Framework Programmes to the program funding by the United States National Institutes of Health

David Fajardo-Ortiz,Bart Thijs,Wolfgang Glanzel,Karin R. Sipido

2024-10-22

Abstract:We investigated whether health research funding by the framework programs of the European Union (FP-HR) has moved towards more needs-driven investment, consistent with changes in EU policies, and whether similar changes were present in funding programs of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). To this end, we performed a quantitative analysis of the content of collaborative projects between 2008 and 2023. We used machine learning for classification of projects as basic biomedical, clinical, population, or health policy research. We found that FP-HR funding shifted towards more implementation research. With the exception of the recent NIH-UM1 program, collaborative NIH programs remain predominantly biomedical research. Infectious diseases is an emerging theme. We conclude that demand for solutions for better health care has led to expanded funding for collaborative implementation- and impact-oriented research, at the expense of basic biomedical research. Compared to NIH, the FPs show greater flexibility to adjust their funding portfolios.

Digital Libraries
NIH advisory group pushes for big pay raise for U.S. postdocs

Katie Langin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adn6358

IF: 56.9

2023-12-22

Science

Abstract:Though applauded by many, measure would strain lab budgets if adopted.
National Institutes of Health grant funding for cerebrovascular diseases

Hassan Kobeissi,Mohamed Sobhi Jabal,Sherief Ghozy,Santhosh Arul,Ryan M Naylor,Ramanathan Kadirvel,Waleed Brinjikji,David F Kallmes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/jnis-2023-020374

2024-01-12

Abstract:Background: Federal research funding is highly sought after but may be challenging to attain. A clear understanding of funding for specific diseases, such as cerebrovascular disorders, might help researchers regarding which National Institutes of Health (NIH) institutes fund research into specific disorders and grant types. Objective: To examine the current scope of NIH grant funding for cerebrovascular conditions. Methods: The NIH-developed RePORTER was used to extract active NIH-funded studies related to cerebrovascular diseases through January 2023. Duplicate studies were removed, and projects were manually screened and labeled in subcategories as clinical and basic science and as research subcategories. Extracted data included total funding, grant types, institutions that received funding, and diseases studied. Python (version 3.9) and SciPy library were used for statistical analyses. Results: We identified 1232 cerebrovascular projects across seven diseases with US$699 952 926 in total funding. The cerebrovascular diseases with the greatest number of grants were ischemic stroke (705, or 57.2% of all funded projects), carotid disease (193, or 15.7%), and hemorrhagic stroke (163, or 13.2%). R01 grants were the most common mechanism of funding (632 grants, or 51.3%). The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) funded the most projects (504 projects; US$325 536 405), followed by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) (376 projects; US$216 784 546). Conclusion: Cerebrovascular disease receives roughly US$700 million in NIH funding. Ischemic stroke accounts for the majority of NIH-funded cerebrovascular projects, and R01 grants are the most common funding mechanism. Notably, NHLBI provides a large proportion of funding, in addition to NINDS.
NIH director offers support for Asian researchers

Jocelyn Kaiser

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.ads6029

IF: 56.9

2024-08-25

Science

Abstract:Six years into agency's efforts to curtail foreign interference, some say it should apologize

multidisciplinary sciences
The pediatric surgeon-scientist: An evolving Breed or endangered phenotype?

Nikhil R. Shah,Keerthi Burgi,Dimitra M. Lotakis,Niki Matusko,Erika A. Newman,Samir K. Gadepalli

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2024.04.028

IF: 3.125

2024-05-09

The American Journal of Surgery

Abstract:Introduction National Institute of Health (NIH) funding is a "gold-standard" of achievement; we examined trends in NIH-funded pediatric surgeons. Methods NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools (RePORT) was queried for American Pediatric Surgical Association (APSA) members (2012 vs 2022). Demographics and time-to-award (TTA) from fellowship were compared. Number of grants, funding allotment, award classification, administering institutes/centers, research type were studied. Results Thirty-eight (4.6%) APSA members were NIH-funded in 2012 compared to 37 (2.9%) in 2022. Of funded surgeons in 2022, 27% were repeat awardees from 2012. TTA was similar (12 vs 14years, p=0.109). At each point, awards were commonly R01 grants (40 vs 52%, p = 0.087) and basic science-related (76 vs 63%, p = 0.179). Awardees were predominantly men (82% in 2012 vs 78% in 2022, p=0.779) and White (82% in 2012 vs 76% in 2022, p=0.586). Median amount per grant increased: 364,025 (2022); by 390,911 for women. Median awards for White surgeons increased by 30,074 for non-White surgeons, though not significantly (p=0.368). Conclusion The landscape of NIH-funded pediatric surgeons has remained unchanged between time points. With a substantial number of repeat awardees, predominance of R01 grants, and a median TTA over a decade after fellowship graduation, the phenotypes of early career pediatric surgeon-scientists are facing academic endangerment.

surgery
Not Enough Cash Goes to Brain Tumour Research, Doctors Say

Nigel Hawkes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g5966

2014-01-01

BMJ

Abstract:Brain tumours continue to be the poor relation in cancer research. Too complex, too variable, and too low profile because they lack a vocal patient group, brain tumours languish low in the funding league table, said a group of specialists at a briefing held at London’s Science Media Centre on 30 September. This is despite statistics showing that brain tumours are the main cause of cancer deaths in children and people under 40. Better ascertainment has shown that they are not as rare as once believed and are responsible for around 3500 deaths …
Nhs England Drops 16 Medicines From Cancer Drugs Fund

Nigel Hawkes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h4803

2015-01-01

Abstract:NHS England has stemmed rising costs in the Cancer Drugs Fund by eliminating a further 16 medicines, used in 23 treatments, from the list it is prepared to pay for. At the beginning of 2015, 84 therapies were paid for by the fund, but, after a cull in May and this new review, the number has more than halved. Among high profile casualties was Kadcyla (trastuzumab emtansine), a medicine from Roche for advanced breast cancer that can extend life by six months but costs £90 000 (€123 000; $137 000) a year for each patient. Avastin (bevacizumab), another Roche product, was also deleted for three indications in colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer.1 Existing patients on any of the excluded drugs will be able to continue their treatments. Roche and cancer charities reacted strongly to the changes, Breast Cancer Now calling it “a dreadful day.” Daniel Thurley, medical director of Roche Products, condemned a “stop and start” approach to cancer medicines and disclosed …
National Institutes of Health Funding for Surgeon-Scientists in the US

Lindsay A. Demblowski,Seth M. Steinberg,Rebecca A. Meseroll,George M. Santangelo,Martha A. Zeiger

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2023.7167

2024-03-14

JAMA Surgery

Abstract:This Special Communication provides an update on the status of surgeons funded by the National Institutes of Health for fiscal year 2022.

surgery
335 Federal Research Funding Trends for Cerebrovascular Neurosurgeons: The Decline of the Cerebrovascular Surgeon-Scientist?

Sangami Pugazenthi,Anja I. Srienc,Luke Cantu,Anna Huguenard,Emad N. Eskandar,William J. Mack,Sepideh Amin-Hanjani,Ananth K. Vellimana,Gregory J. Zipfel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1227/neu.0000000000002809_335

IF: 5.315

2024-04-01

Neurosurgery

Abstract:INTRODUCTION: With the rise of endovascular neurosurgery, the number of cerebrovascular (CV) surgeons has grown. However, it is unclear whether the number of CV surgeon-scientists has concomitantly increased. METHODS: Publicly available data were collected on currently practicing academic CV surgeons in the US. Inflation-adjusted NIH funding between 2009-2021 was surveyed using NIH RePORTER. The K12 Neurosurgeon Career Development Program grant data were queried for CV-focused grants. Pearson R correlation was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: From 2009-2021, NIH funding has increased: in total (p = 0.0318), to neurosurgeons (p < 0.0001), to CV research projects (p < 0.0001), and to CV surgeons (p = 0.0018). There has been an increase in the total number of CV surgeons (p < 0.0001), NIH-funded CV surgeons (p = 0.0034), and the percent of CV surgeons with NIH funding (p = 0.370). Additionally, active NIH grant dollars per CV surgeon (p = 0.0047) and number of NIH grants per CV surgeon (p = 0.0078) has increased. However, the percent of neurosurgeon-awarded NIH grants awarded specifically to CV surgeons has trended down over the past decade (p=0.3664). Analysis of early-career research grants showed a decline in the proportion of K12 applicants (p = 0.1840). CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that there are more CV surgeons than ever, and there has been a proportional increase in number of NIH-funded CV surgeons. However, there are fewer early-career neurosurgeons pursuing CV-focused projects, and the proportion of neurosurgeon-awarded NIH grants given to CV surgeons has trended down. These findings suggest a declining trend in CV surgeons pursuing research careers.

surgery,clinical neurology

Cuts to high-profile NIH efforts leave researchers reeling

NIH's flat budget for 2024 will force 'very difficult decisions'

Major biomedical funder NIH poised for massive reform under Trump 2.0

U.S. blocks funding for pandemic research group

Evolution of priorities in strategic funding for collaborative health research. A comparison of the European Union Framework Programmes to the program funding by the United States National Institutes of Health

A crisis in clinical research

Once reluctant, new NIH chief Monica Bertagnolli embraces role

Bill targeting Chinese firms worries U.S. researchers

Scientific Talent Leaks Out of Funding Gaps

An evaluation of programs to support new investigators at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases: Striking a balance with funding for established investigators

Analysis of National Institutes of Health Funding for the COVID-19 Pandemic

Large Publication Gap for Gynecologic Cancers in High–Impact Factor Journals

Evolution of funding for collaborative health research towards higher-level patient-oriented research. A comparison of the European Union Framework Programmes to the program funding by the United States National Institutes of Health

NIH advisory group pushes for big pay raise for U.S. postdocs

National Institutes of Health grant funding for cerebrovascular diseases

NIH director offers support for Asian researchers

The pediatric surgeon-scientist: An evolving Breed or endangered phenotype?

Not Enough Cash Goes to Brain Tumour Research, Doctors Say

Nhs England Drops 16 Medicines From Cancer Drugs Fund

National Institutes of Health Funding for Surgeon-Scientists in the US

335 Federal Research Funding Trends for Cerebrovascular Neurosurgeons: The Decline of the Cerebrovascular Surgeon-Scientist?