Search

The mission of translational science is to bring predictivity and efficiency to the development and dissemination of interventions that improve human health. Ten years ago this year, the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences was founded to embody, conduct, and support this new discipline. The Center's first decade has brought substantial progress across a broad range of translational areas, from diagnostic and drug development to clinical trials to implementation science to education. The origins of the translational science and advances to this point are reviewed here and allow the establishment of an ambitious future research agenda for the field., (Published 2021. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA. Clinical and Translational Science published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of the American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

Total NIH funding dollars have increased from 2009-2018. We questioned whether this growth has occurred proportionately around the country and throughout allopathic medical schools. Therefore, we compared the trend in NIH grant funding from 2009 to 2018 for United States allopathic medical schools among historically top-funded schools, private and public schools, and by region of the country. Changes in both unadjusted and real funding dollars over time revealed a significant difference. Region was the only significant factor for mean percent change in funding from 2009-2018, with the Western region showing a 33.79% increase in purchasing power. The Northeastern region showed a -6.64% decrease in purchasing power while the Central and Southern regions reported changes of 2.46% and -6.08%, respectively. The mean percent increases were more proportional and nonsignificant in the public vs. private institutions comparison, at -3.41% and 4.75%, respectively. Likewise, the top-funded institutions vs. other institutions comparisons demonstrated modest, nonsignificant differences. However, although the relative changes might be proportional, the absolute increases evidence a pattern of growing cumulative advantage that favor the highest-funded institutions and private institutions. The potential consequences of this disproportionate increase include health science education, biomedical research, and patient access disparities in large parts of the country. The NIH and the scientific community should explore potential solutions in its funding models., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has played a major role in promoting behavioral medicine research over the past 40 years through funding, review, and priority-setting activities and programs including scientific conferences, meetings, workgroups, intramural research, and training opportunities. In this review of NIH activities in support of behavioral medicine over the past four decades, we highlight key events, programs, projects, and milestones that demonstrate the many ways in which the NIH has supported behavioral and social sciences research and advanced the public health while contributing to the evolution of behavioral medicine as a scientific field.

After World War II, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) emerged as a major patron of biomedical research. In the succeeding decades, NIH administrators sought to determine how best to disseminate the findings of the research it supported and manage their relationship with clinicians in the national community. This task of bridging research and practice fell to the Office of Medical Applications of Research (OMAR), which administered the NIH Consensus Development Program (CDP) between 1978 and 2012. This article argues that the CDP represented an unusual attempt to depoliticize biomedical research and medical practice at a particularly controversial time in American medicine. Throughout the program's existence, administrators sought ways to bring new knowledge to the medical community without creating the appearance of regulating clinical practice. For an agency with a mandate to promote the production of new biomedical knowledge, the question remained open as to how far this responsibility extended from the bench to the bedside. In striking this balance, the leadership sought to refine their understanding of the role and mission of the NIH. The history of the CDP has much to tell us about postwar biomedical research, health politics, and the institutional development of the NIH.

This article examines the history and effect of the Consensus Development Program (CDP) at the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Introduced at a time when the relationship between the U.S. public and the medical profession was at a nadir, the CDP frequently placed the NIH in the middle of broader debates in medical practice and health policy during the last quarter of the 20th century. Drawing on published and archival sources, this paper sheds light on the challenges associated with collecting, assessing, and communicating evidence to medical professionals and convincing them to act on it in the name of improved health care. Administrators at the NIH sought a middle ground between changing medical practice and respecting professional autonomy, with varying degrees of success. This debate has continued implications today as tensions persist between scientific guidelines and the clinical medicine practiced by physicians and expected by patients.

This is an obituary for Richard Hudson Quarles, an internationally renowned neuroscientist, who retired in 2007 after 39 years at the National Institutes of Health, and who died August 9, 2015 in Sandy Spring, Maryland, USA. Richard Hudson Quarles, circa 1984, courtesy of The NIH Record newsletter., (© 2016 International Society for Neurochemistry.)

The establishment of National Institutes of Health (NIH) extramural grants in the second half of the twentieth century marked a signal shift in support for medical research in the United States and created an influential model for the rest of the world. A similar landmark development occurred in the first half of the twentieth century with the creation of the Rockefeller Foundation and its funding programs for medical research. The programs and support of the foundation had a dramatic impact on medical research in the United States and globally. This paper examines early connections between these two developments. The NIH grants have usually been seen as having their roots primarily in the government programs of the Second World War. This article finds direct and indirect influence by the Rockefeller Foundation, as well as parallel developments in these two monumental programs of support for medical research., (© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Starting in the 1950s, physicians and researchers began to debate the exact nature of the relationship among blood cholesterol, diet, and cardiovascular risk. Using professional medical, public health, and scientific journals, this article examines the history of a series of intense and sustained debates regarding the credibility of the diet-heart hypothesis, which proposed that diet was causally linked to coronary artery disease. Brought about by intellectual disagreements and illuminated by personal quarrels, these debates created a profound professional rift among researchers who debated whether observational data could be used to prove that dietary intake caused heart disease and who sought to differentiate between "good" and "bad" science. But while the debate persisted into the early 1980s, Americans had begun to adopt the diet-heart hypothesis as public health truth as early as the 1960s, embracing cookbooks promoting "heart healthy" diets that promised to prevent coronary artery disease. Although critics and advocates of diet-heart continued to debate the theory's finer points, the widespread adoption of diet-heart in American homes meant that the debate had become almost moot by the time the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute officially endorsed the hypothesis in the 1980s., (© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

National Institutes of Health traces its root to a one-room laboratory created in 1887. Now it has become a federal agency including 27 institutes and centers, also one of the world biggest centers of biomedical research.Throughout the history of NIH, much experience is worth learning, for example: allocating persistent and sufficient funds, basing on basic research and adjusting its focus duly, expanding the scope of subsidizing and stressing talent cultivation.

In 1968, Dr. James Cleaver reported defective DNA repair in cultured cells from patients with xeroderma pigmentosum. This link between clinical disease and molecular pathophysiology has sparked interest in understanding not only the clinical characteristics of sun sensitivity, damage and cancer that occurred in XP patients but also the mechanisms underlying the damage and repair. While affected patients are rare, their exaggerated UV damage provides a window into the workings of DNA repair. These studies have clarified the importance of a functioning DNA repair system to the maintenance of skin and neurologic health in the general population. Understanding the role of damage in causing cancer, neurologic degeneration, hearing loss and internal cancers provides an opportunity for prevention and treatment. Characterizing complementation groups pointed to the importance of different underlying genes. Studying differences in cancer age of onset and underlying molecular signatures in cancers occurring either in XP patients or the general population has led to insights into differences in carcinogenic mechanisms. The accelerated development of cancers in XP has been used as a model to discover new cancer chemopreventive agents. An astute insight can be a "tipping point" triggering decades of productive inquiry., (© 2015 The American Society of Photobiology.)

Cooperation between a journal editor and the federal Office of Research Integrity (ORI) in addressing investigations of research misconduct, each performing their own responsibilities while keeping each other informed of events and evidence, can be critical to the professional and regulatory resolution of a case. This paper describes the history of one of ORI's most contentious investigations that involved falsification of research on Parkinson's disease patients by James Abbs, Professor of Neurology, University of Wisconsin, published in the journal Neurology, which was handled cooperatively by the authors, who were the chief ORI investigator and the Editor-in-Chief of Neurology, respectively.

In 1960, J. Anthony Morris, a molecular biologist at the US National Institutes of Health conducted one of the only non-therapeutic clinical studies of the cancer virus SV40. Morris and his research team aimed to determine whether SV40 was a serious harm to human health, since many scientists at the time suspected that SV40 caused cancer in humans based on evidence from in vivo animal studies and experiments with human tissue. Morris found that SV40 had no significant effect but his claim has remained controversial among scientists and policymakers through the present day--both on scientific and ethical grounds. Why did Morris only conduct one clinical study on the cancer-causing potential of SV40 in healthy humans? We use the case to explain how empirical evidence and ethical imperatives are, paradoxically, often dependent on each other and mutually exclusive in clinical research, which leaves answers to scientific and ethical questions unsettled. This paper serves two goals: first, it documents a unique--and uniquely important--study of clinical research on SV40. Second, it introduces the concept of "the stowaway," which is a special type of contaminant that changes the past in the present moment. In the history of science, stowaways are misfortunes that nonetheless afford research that otherwise would have been impossible specifically by creating new pasts. This case (Morris' study) and concept (the stowaway) bring together history of science and philosophy of history for productive dialog., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose of Review: In fiscally challenging times, scientists must seek creative strategies and leverage existing resources to advance research., Recent Findings: This review describes programmes supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to promote research in paediatric cardiology and congenital heart disease (CHD)., Summary: An understanding of NHLBI-supported research programmes will help investigators identify opportunities to collaborate with existing systems and use scientific results from existing efforts to catalyse future research in CHD.

The Center for Human Immunology, Autoimmunity, and Inflammation (CHI) is an exciting initiative of the NIH intramural program begun in 2009. It is uniquely trans-NIH in support (multiple institutes) and leadership (senior scientists from several institutes who donate their time). Its goal is an in-depth assessment of the human immune system using high-throughput multiplex technologies for examination of immune cells and their products, the genome, gene expression, and epigenetic modulation obtained from individuals both before and after interventions, adding information from in-depth clinical phenotyping, and then applying advanced biostatistical and computer modeling methods for mining these diverse data. The aim is to develop a comprehensive picture of the human "immunome" in health and disease, elucidate common pathogenic pathways in various diseases, identify and validate biomarkers that predict disease progression and responses to new interventions, and identify potential targets for new therapeutic modalities. Challenges, opportunities, and progress are detailed., (Published 2013. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.)

Dear colleagues: Our loyal friend Kuan-Teh Jeang, "Teh" to friends and colleagues, passed away unexpectedly at the age of 54 on the evening of January 27, 2013. Great shock and sorrow was apparent in the avalanche of email messages by the very many international colleagues with whom Teh interacted over the years. Many of us came to know Teh as an energetic and gifted scientist for whom we had much respect and affection.

This paper reviews the development of therapy for acute myelogenous leukemia that in 1973 led to the regimen of 7days of continuous intravenous arabinosylcytosine (cytarabine) and the first 3 concurrent days of intravenous daunorubicin, given the nickname "7+3." The state of leukemia treatment in the 1950s, 1960s and early 1970s is reviewed, the discovery of the two drugs in question described, and the introduction of clinical trials to reach an optimal regimen for their use delineated. During the 1950s, following World War Two and after a period of civil reconstitution, a national effort, facilitated by the U.S. Congress and federal investments in the National Cancer Institute, was initiated to enhance cancer therapy in the United States. The development of mouse models of leukemia and advances in understanding the structure and function of DNA and RNA and the process of cell proliferation provided new targets for drug development and new concepts for their use. The year, 2013, marks the 40th year that this protocol, 7+3, is the method of induction of remission for most patients with acute myelogenous leukemia. Its inadequacies also are made clear. Many patients with the disease die soon after diagnosis, and patients who have more unfavorable oncogenetic subtypes, intrinsically drug resistant cells, and greater intolerance to therapy make up the vast majority of the affected and few are cured. It is evident to all that new paradigms are needed if acute myelogenous leukemia is to be subdued in most patients with the disease., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The intramural gerontological research program in the National Institutes of Health underwent a substantial growth after its creation within the precincts of the Baltimore City Hospitals in 1940. This paper analyzes its development and the associated problems of its early years. Gerontologists aimed at improving the social and economic life of the elderly through scientific research. With this aim in mind, they conducted various investigations using the indigent aged patients of the Baltimore City Hospitals. Yet the scientists of aging, who hoped to eliminate negative social factors that might bias their research and heighten the confusion between pathology and aging per se, eventually stopped using these patients in the hospital as human subjects. Instead they sought educated affluent subjects in order to eliminate the impact of poverty. By doing so, however, they introduced a new source of social bias to their work, especially within the novel project begun in 1958, the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging. This article thus examines the context of the development of gerontologists' research by analyzing their agenda, institutional environment, and research subjects in the 1940s and the 1950s.

Fascination with the interworkings of the human body has permeated scientific discovery for eons. Materials for dissection proved problematic for anatomists. Andreas Vesalius solved his dilemma by visiting local gallows where criminals had been executed. Eduard Pernkopf has been alleged to have taken some of his materials from victims of the Holocaust. Even today, executed criminals have served as subjects for anatomical educational purposes. These circumstances are explored and the contemporary ethics of each are compared.

In celebrating the 125th anniversary of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in August 2012, NIH has been examining its origins, its history, and the visionary men and women whose research have contributed to the saving and/or improving the quality of life of millions of people throughout the world. This minireview examines Joseph James Kinyoun (1860 to 1919), the 1887 founder of a federal Hygienic Laboratory that is considered the direct ancestor of the modern NIH, and explores the development of NIH as it was shaped by, and in turn shaped, the new field of microbiology.

The National Institute on Aging (NIA) at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) leads the federal effort conducting and supporting research on aging. It is also designated as the lead within NIH for research on Alzheimer's disease. Since NIA's establishment in 1974, it has grown to a billion dollar enterprise featuring a balanced program of basic, clinical, and behavioral and social science. Investigator-initiated research and strategic investments have been critical to the NIA's success in bringing new insights and understandings to aging processes and diseases and conditions associated with advancing age. In recent years, constraints in the growth of resources have posed new challenges as the NIA and NIH leadership seek to maintain a robust and productive program. This article will review the history of the NIA, discuss current programs and priorities, and point to new directions in research, looking ahead., (© 2012, Copyright the Authors Journal compilation © 2012, The American Geriatrics Society.)

Clinical dermatology as a specialty of medicine has made major strides over the past several decades, and major advances in both diagnostic and therapeutic management of skin diseases have benefited patients. The progress in clinical dermatology to a large extent has relied on the robust academic infrastructure developed in recent decades, and we argue that this process has been significantly enhanced by technical innovations in molecular medicine and the integration of cutaneous biology research into the global biomedical research enterprise.

This article explores the 1965 controversy over the Framingham Heart Study in the midst of growing oversight into the management of science at the National Institutes of Health (NIH). It describes how, beginning in the early 1960s, federal overseers demanded that NIH administrators adopt particular management styles in administering programs and how these growing pressures led administrators to favor investigative pursuits that allowed for easy prospective accounting of program payoffs, especially those based on experimental methods designed to examine discrete interventions or outcomes of interest. In light of this changing managerial culture within the NIH, the Framingham study and other population laboratories-with their bases in observation and in open-ended study designs-became harder for NIH administrators to justify and defend.

The U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) are facing significant budgetary challenges as a result of the current economic climate. The recent sunset of investigator-initiated R01-type research grants after one revised submission, coupled with the present lack of an NIH retooling funding mechanism for such grant applicants, creates a concerning risk that talented and well-trained investigators may be forced to give up their research careers. Existing NIH retooling mechanisms include the R55 Shannon Award, which was established in 1991 and was essentially replaced in 2005 by the R56 award. There is an urgent need to either significantly expand the R55/R56 mechanisms and definition of NIH grant bridging/retooling support for unfunded meritorious proposals or introduce a new mechanism that provides specific support to investigators with competitive but unfunded R01 revised grants. An expanded retooling funding mechanism deserves implementation during continuing assessment of whether allowance of only one revision of research proposals has achieved its initial intended goals.