A Review of the Department of Defense's Program for Breast Cancer Research (1997) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
4 U.S. Army Breast Cancer Research Program
4 U.S. Army Breast Cancer Research Program
Pages 45-64
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 45... ...
has evolved over the past 5 years from a small research program pursuing interservice research on breast cancer screening and diagnosis into an organization pursuing a broadbased, competitively awarded research portfolio covering all areas of breast cancer research, with approximately $500 million appropriated to it by Congress over the 4-year period. In its brief history as a peer-reviewed, competitive grants program, the BCRP has reviewed over 7,000 research proposals and developed a diversified $465 million research portfolio of approximately 800 projects distributed to public and private research institutions across the United States and internationally.
|
From page 46... ...
, which was released in September 1993 to invite submission of proposals. Congress extended the BCRP in FY 1994 with an additional $30 million appropriation, stating that "this funding should be used to continue the fiscal year 1992 and 1993 breast cancer research program in accordance with the standards outlined by the Institute of Medicine recommendations." The congressional report stated "the conferees agree that the Department (of Defense)
|
From page 47... ...
The IOM committee outlined the following programmatic aims: · bring new investigators into the field, both junior and established; · encourage communication across disciplines and collaborative studies; · encourage research that extends scientific advances into new strategies for prevention, detection, diagnosis, treatment, and ongoing patient care; · support excellent ongoing research and promising yet underfunded research areas; · stimulate research on the obstacles to widespread dissemination of proven detection methods and diagnostic and therapeutic interventions; · enhance the use of existing research resources and encourage the development of new resources; · encourage women and minorities to apply for grants; encourage investigators to address in their research protocols the needs of minorities, elderly women, and low-income, rural, and other underserved populations; · include women and minorities in the advisory council and study section memberships (IOM, 1993~. The IOM committee envisioned a broad portfolio of investigator-initiated research, articulating the following questions to provide examples of the range of research initiatives considered relevant: What genetic alterations are involved in the origin and progression of breast cancer?
|
From page 48... ...
were intended to stimulate innovative ideas while acknowledging that some may not lead to successful results. The IDEA awards would be directed toward a variety of disciplines for scientists possibly lacking the pilot data necessary to submit a traditional research proposal (IOM, 1993~.
|
From page 49... ...
Scientific excellence would be the primary criterion for awarding grants and programmatic relevance would be secondary "that is, when the Advisory Council receives two excellent proposals but can only fund one, the award should go to the proposal that best meets the programmatic goals" (IOM, 1993~. The committee stated that "if the program is to distribute funds more widely to a new mix of scientists and ideas, then it must have study sections specifically
|
From page 50... ...
Because the committee wished to encourage funding for a wide mix of scientists and ideas, it recommended that the program utilize study sections comprising scientists from a range of disciplines, career levels, and perspectives, with special consideration given to appointing women and minorities. Study section chairs should be senior scientists who are widely recognized as experts in their fields, with experience as technical reviewers.
|
From page 51... ...
The program director developed a multifaceted program infrastructure made up of an Army program management team (PMT) , a contractor overseeing peer review, peer review panels, a contractor overseeing programmatic review and grants management, and the Integration Panel (IP - originally conceived of as the advisory council by the 1993 IOM committee (see Figure 4-1~.
|
From page 52... ...
USAMRMC Breast Cancer Research Program organizational chart. assisting USAMRMC in evaluating them and providing logistical and administrative support to the IP (e.g., meeting arrangements, preparation of draft documents, and facilitation of programmatic review)
|
From page 53... ...
. Also in accordance with the 1993 IOM committee's recommendations, the IP has had a significant role in other aspects of the program's operation advising the Army on the content and type of BAAs, number of solicitations, timing, and application formats; providing advice and guidelines on the operation of the study sections; and monitoring the program.
|
From page 54... ...
Although funding of projects in the heavily invested areas of molecular biology, cell biology, and mammography would continue, the extent of investment in these areas would be limited to those projects judged to be highly innovative or very likely to have a positive impact on breast cancer prevention, treatment, and cure. The IP recommended that the 1995 BAA be reworded to make clear that the BCRP seeks proposals of all types, including those concerning "all areas of basics clinical and epidemiologic research including all disciplines within the basic sciences, the basic health sciences, the clinical sciences, as well as public health, economics, social sciences, psychosocial sciences, quality tof]
|
From page 55... ...
While formerly oriented toward research on breast cancer prevention, detection, treatment, and quality of life, the mission of the BCRP explicitly shifted towards breast cancer eradication. The original BCRP mission, as detailed in the BAAs from 1993 and 1995, was to "promote research directed towards reducing the incidence of breast cancer, increasing survival rates, and improving the quality of life for those diagnosed with the disease" (USAMRDC, 1 993; USAMRMC, 1 995b)
|
From page 56... ...
Some argued that focusing on IDEAs would not be responsible because there were insufficient numbers of scientifically meritorious IDEA proposals received during the FY 1993/1994 and FY 1995 funding cycles. These opponents also argued that an emphasis on the IDEA approach meant ignoring research in genetics and other basic science research areas which have the potential to lead to the eradication of breast cancer.
|
From page 57... ...
To familiarize all concerned with the newly adopted review criteria and program objectives and to assure that these changes were understood at every level of review, the IP provided an orientation program to the executive secretaries and members of the primary review panels. Discussion by the committee of some of the above-described changes in the goals, strategies, and criteria for the 1996 program appears in Chapter 6.
|
From page 58... ...
The project director also has overall responsibility for the administrative and logistical operations for the entire peer review effort. UIS has produced detailed orientation materials and guidebooks for executive secretaries that include definitions for IDEA grants and translational research as well as for scientist and consumer reviewers.
|
From page 59... ...
Some executive secretaries have allowed members to chose the proposals for which they would serve as primary or secondary reviewers. Scientist reviewers are asked to prepare written evaluations of assigned proposals prior to the panel meeting and provide these to the research technical assistant (RTA)
|
From page 60... ...
The IP considers whether the proposal was reviewed by the most appropriate scientific review panel and in the most appropriate review category and whether the scientific merit score given reflects the information contained in the summary statement. The IP reviews applications first in subject area subgroups and then in full committee.
|
From page 61... ...
Based on the initial investment strategy, each IP subgroup is assigned an approximate dollar amount to spend; it ranks applications in turn until the allocation plus an additional 30°/O is spent. The proposals that were automatically funded were included in each subgroup's allocation.
|
From page 62... ...
Consumer participation in the BCRP occurs at both levels of review. Consumers are members of the first-level peer review panels, where they read proposals, present their opinions after the primary and secondary reviewers' presentations, assign scores, and have full voting privileges.
|
From page 63... ...
However, applicants also have to comply with a DOD-specific set of requirements and regulations in those areas. During the FY 1993/1994 funding cycle, all the grant applications submitted to the BCRP went to the Regulatory Affairs Office at the same time they were
|
From page 64... ...
Over the course of the Army review process, statements of work are finalized and time lines are established. Site visits are not routinely made for these awards; they occur only on special occasions.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.