News

Rally seeks to restore funding for biomedical research


 

AT THE AACR ANNUAL MEETING

WASHINGTON – Flat funding over the last decade combined with inflation has effectively cut 20% out of the research budget for the National Institutes of Health – and now another 5% is gone thanks to the federal budget sequester.

Cancer researchers, practicing oncologists, advocates, and congressional supporters took a break from the annual meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research to protest the long and lingering decline in funding. They were joined at the Rally for Medical Research by representatives from at least 200 partner organizations involved in research, patient care, or advocacy for diabetes, heart disease, stroke, Alzheimer’s disease, and AIDS, among other conditions.

Even President Obama chimed in via a message read by Dr. Margaret Foti, AACR chief executive officer.

"By investing in the best ideas and supporting the work of our scientists, we will improve health and change lives in ways we could have never imagined," read Dr. Foti from the president’s remarks.

In her own remarks, Dr. Foti said that just showing up was important to the greater goal. "By participating in today’s rally, you are taking a very important step to ensure that America will continue to lead the world in medical research," she said.

The rally focused on the cuts to funding for the 27 institutes and centers at the National Institutes of Health. The NIH is currently funded at $30.6 billion, which makes it biggest supporter of medical research in the world, according to rally organizers. But, they said, NIH appropriations have been flat since 2003. Factoring in biomedical inflation, the agency has effectively lost approximately $6 billion, or 20% of its purchasing power over that same time period. Sequestration threatens another 5%, or $5 billion cut.

Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), an ovarian cancer survivor, said at the rally that biomedical research helps grow the economy. "Every dollar that goes to the NIH results in $2 of business activity," she said, calling on rally participants to visit their congressional delegations and urge them to take money from other programs to balance the budget.

Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), is whose district NIH is headquartered, said that continued cuts to biomedical funding could deter young people from pursuing careers in science.

"We should not be retreating on medical research, we should be redoubling our efforts," said Rep. Van Hollen, who serves as ranking member on the House Budget Committee.

Rep. Van Hollen said he hoped the rally would bring a sharper focus to the impact of the sequester. "The more public attention we draw to this issue, the better chance we’ll have at replacing the sequester," he said in an interview. "This is one area that has consequences for people of every political persuasion."

The sequester cuts are being felt already, according to Candace Johnson, Ph.D., deputy director of the Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, N.Y. The institute could lose at least $8 million from its overall budget of $550 million, but the cuts will fall disproportionately on the research programs, Dr. Johnson said in an interview. And there’s continued uncertainty with the sequester – it is possible that some grants will be cut even more than anticipated. "We’re in the dark here," she said.

Cutting research will also have an effect on clinical care, Dr. Johnson said. "When you cut basic science, you cut that road to better and more innovative clinical care. If you don’t have basic science, you don’t have cancer centers doing basic discovery, then you don’t have a phase I program."

Dr. Sandra Swain, president of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, said that sustained and predictable funding increases were crucial to progress. And she noted, there’s no substitute for federal funds. "While private industry is a strong partner in cancer research, public funding is essential to pursue the types of research in which industry may have no interest," she said, in a statement. "This is particularly true for rare diseases, combinations of different companies’ products, therapies with multiple treatment modalities (such as surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy), and direct comparisons of company products," Dr. Swain said.

ASCO also sounded a note of caution about the budget for the Food and Drug Administration, which is also cut under sequestration. ASCO "is concerned that sequestration will cause slower approval of new and potentially life-saving drugs, difficulty in meeting challenges in monitoring of food and drug safety, and an inability to keep up with advancing science and technology," Dr. Swain said.

aault@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @aliciaault

Recommended Reading

Survey: How appearance counts in ICU
MDedge Cardiology
MOC will be focus for new ABIM president
MDedge Cardiology
Feds abandon fight for graphic cigarette labels
MDedge Cardiology
ACA Turns 3: The Policy & Practice Podcast
MDedge Cardiology
CMS's eHealth initiative takes aim at runaway digital demands
MDedge Cardiology
Implementing Health Reform: Medicare experiments with bundled payments
MDedge Cardiology
Only 11% of health plan payments are value based
MDedge Cardiology
NCQA offers medical home recognition to specialists
MDedge Cardiology
Physicians' spouses/partners satisfied with relationships
MDedge Cardiology
Money Troubles: The Policy & Practice Podcast
MDedge Cardiology