>>I WANT TO WELCOME
EVERYONE TO THE 215th MEETING OF
THE NATIONAL ADVISORY COUNCIL
FOR NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS AND
STROKE.
EVERYONE IS JOINING US VIRTUALLY
FOR THIS MEETING.
ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS SHOULD BE
PRESENT OR JOINING SHORTLY.
SINCE WE LAST MET WE HAVE NEW
COUNCIL MEMBERS APPOINTED AND
ONE WHO CAN'T MAKE IT TODAY AND
HOPEFULLY APPOINTED SOON.
AMY IS THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF
THE CHILD NEUROLOGY FOUNDATION
OUT OF MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA.
SHE IS A CONVENING PATIENT
ADVOCACY ORGANIZATION ACROSS
DISEASE STATES DRIVING EDUCATION
AND SUPPORT PROGRAMMING AND
PRIOR TO BECOMING THE CEO SHE
WAS ADVANCED PRACTICE NURSE WITH
BLUE GRASS CARE NAVIGATORS.
WE WELCOME AND WILL BENEFIT FROM
HER WISE COUNSEL.
NEXT IS JOHN DIRECTOR OF THE
GROSSMAN INSTITUTE FOR
NEUROSCIENCE AT THE UNIVERSITY
OF CHICAGO AND WAVE, JOHN.
HIS RESEARCH IS ATTENTION,
VISION AND CORTEX AND
OPTOGENETICS AND RECEIVED MANY
ACADEMIC AWARDS FUNDED BY NIH
SINCE THE LAST '80s AND GOT HIS
Ph.D. IN BIOLOGY FROM CAL TECH
AND A CO-CHAIR OF THE BRAIN
INITIATIVE 2.0 ADVISORY
COMMITTEE TO THE NIH DIRECTOR SO
HE'S ALSO ONE OF OUR
REPRESENTATIVES ON THE BRAIN
MULTI-COUNCIL WORKING GROUP.
GRATEFUL BEING ON THE COUNCIL
AND FOR EVERYTHING ELSE WE DO.
NEXT IS LOUISE.
>> I DON'T THINK SHE'S HERE YET.
>> CAN'T DO IT IF SHE'S NOT HERE
BUT BOB IS STILL WAITING FINAL
APPROVAL AND HE'S DIRECTOR OF
THE U-MASS CENTER FOR
THERAPEUTICS AND WAS PREVENTION
OF THE CHAIR OF NEUROLOGY IN
MASSACHUSETTS AND WORKS IN NERVE
DEGENERATIVE DISORDER IN GENERAL
AND SERVED AS THE CO-CHAIR OF
THE INTRAMURAL BOARD OF COUNCIL
AT NINDS BETWEEN 2018 AND 2020
AND CO-CHAIR OF THE STRATEGIC
PLANNING EFFORTS IN ALS JUST
KICKING OFF AND WE'LL HEAR MORE
ABOUT.
WE HAVE AN INTERESTING OPEN
SESSION.
>> LOUISE POPPED IN.
>> I THOUGHT YOU SAID YOU WERE
NEVER LATE FOR EVERYTHING.
PROFESSOR AND SHE'S PREVIOUSLY
PROFESSOR, DIRECTOR OF
UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT HEALTH
CENTER AND WORLD LEADER IN
STUDIES OF CLINICAL DISEASE AND
HAS WON AN INVESTIGATOR AWARD
AND SERVES AS THE SCIENCE
ADVISORY AND COORDINATING
COMMITTEE AS WELL AS THE
NORTHEAST CONSORTIUM.
SHE RECEIVED HER Ph.D. IN
NEUROSCIENCE FROM THE UNIVERSITY
OF CONNECTICUT AND M.D. FROM THE
CONNECTICUT SCHOOL OF MEDICINE,
RESIDENCY AND FELLOWSHIP,
TRAINING AND LAB WORK DONE AT
HOPKINS AFTER HER RESIDENCY.
AGAIN, WELCOME, LOUISE.
>> THANKS FOR HAVING ME.
>> LOOKING FORWARD TO IT.
>> WE HAVE INTERESTING AND
IMPORTANT TOPICS ON THE DOCKET
FOR THE OPEN SESSION OF COUNCIL
PARTICULARLY WE'LL BE TALKING
ABOUT EFFORTS TO IMPROVE
DIVERSITY IN THE WORKFORCE
LOOKING FOR COMMENTS THERE AND
OTHER ISSUES IN THE DIRECTOR'S
REPORT.
IMPORTANTLY, WE HAVE RICK AND
BARBARA WHO LED THE CLINICAL
NETWORK EVALUATION THAT'S GONE
ON OVER THE YEAR AND THEY'LL
GIVE THEIR REPORT ON HOW THEY
THINK CAN BE MORE EFFECTIVE IN
CLINICAL TRIAL NETWORK AND HAVE
A STRATEGIC PLAN HOW NINDS CAN
BETTER PROMOTE HEALTH EQUITY IN
NEUROLOGIC DISEASES.
WE HAVE AN UPDATE FROM DR. JOHN
NEI ABOUT THE BRAIN INITIATIVE.
SHOULD BE AN INTERESTING COUNCIL
OPEN SESSION.
FOR ME TO MAKE SURE I DO THINGS
RIGHT.
I PRERECORD THE DIRECTOR'S
MESSAGE SO I CAN CHANGE THINGS
AND THERE'S STILL A COUPLE
MISTAKES BUT WHY DON'T WE SHOW
THE'S MESSAGE, PLEASE.
>> WAIT A SECOND, WALTER.
WE HAVE THINGS TO DO FIRST.
SO I'M BOB FINKELSTEIN.
I'M START WITH MY USUAL REMINDER
THE OPEN SESSION IS VIDEOCAST,
OBVIOUSLY, LIVE AND ALSO
ARCHIVED FOR POSTERITY SO TRY TO
LOOK AND ACT YOUR BEST.
I THINK EVERYONE HAS ZOOMED DOWN
AFTER THE LAST TWO OR MORE YEARS
SO I'M NOT GOING TO TALK ABOUT
PROCESS.
JUST A COUPLE QUICK REMINDERS,
IF YOU WANT TO MAKE A MOTION
JUST SPEAK UP OR RAISE YOUR
ACTUAL HAND OR YOUR EMOJI HAND.
ALSO, REMEMBER THAT WE'RE GOING
TO BE VOTING USING THE CHAT
FUNCTION.
WHENEVER THERE'S A MOTION MADE
BY A COUNCIL MEMBER AND SECOND,
WE'LL ENTER THAT IN THE CHAT AND
YOU CAN VOTE, YES, NO OR
ABSTAIN.
ANY QUESTION THE PROCESS OF THE
MEETING BEFORE I LAUNCH INTO MY
USUAL SOLILOQUY?
I SEE HEADS SHAKING SO I'LL KEEP
GOING.
THE FIRST THING WE HAVE DO IS
GET YOUR APPROVAL OF THE
MINUTES UNDER THE GENERAL
INFORMATION TAB THAT'S QUITE A
BUREAUCRATIC MOUTHFUL.
UNLESS YOU WANT TO DISCUSS THE
MINUTES I DO NEED A MOTION TO
APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM THE
LAST COUNCIL MEETING.
IS THERE A MOTION?
I SEE ONE AND A SECOND KELLY
WELL IN ENTER THAT SO PLEASE
VOTE.
I'LL WAIT ONE SECOND.
LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE UNANIMOUSLY
APPROVED THE MINUTES.
AND THE DATES FOR ALL THE
COUNCIL MEETINGS THROUGH 2023
ARE LISTED.
NOTICE THAT WE'RE GOING TO KEEP
HAVING MEETINGS ON WEDNESDAYS
AND THURSDAYS.
WE USED TO HAVE THEM ON
THURSDAYS AND FRIDAYS SO HOLD
THE DATES AND LET KELLY KNOW IF
YOU HAVE ANY CONFLICTS AS FAR AS
IN ADVANCE AS POSSIBLE.
WE JUST LEARNED FROM NIH CENTRAL
THAT MAY MEETINGS WILL BE
MANDATED TO BE VIRTUAL WE DON'T
KNOW THAT BUT THE NEXT ONE WE
WILL BE VIRTUAL.
WE HAVE THE GROUND RULES THAT
GOVERN HOW OUR STAFF INTERACT
WITH COUNCIL AND THESE WERE
POSTED IN THE ECB GENERAL INFO
TAB AND ONLY MADE ONE MINOR
CHANGE TO THE PROCEDURES.
IF YOU'RE FOLLOWING ALONG ON THE
SECOND PAGE WE CLARIFIED OUR
EARLY CONCURRENCE PROCESS WHICH
MOST KNOW WHAT THAT IS.
THAT'S WHEN THREE DESIGNATED
COUNCIL MEMBERS APPROVE A SUBSET
OF APPLICATIONS BEFORE THE
COUNCIL MEETING EVEN OCCURS SO
WHEN WE GET THE AWARDS OUT THE
DOOR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
WE ADDED LANGUAGE AND WE'LL PUT
IT ON THE CLOSED SESSION AGENDA.
WE ALWAYS ACTUALLY DID DO THIS
BUT WE NEEDED TO EXPLICITLY
STATE IT IN THE OPERATING
PROCEDURES.
ANY QUESTIONS?
IF NOT, I FORMALLY NEED A
MOTION.
>> JOHN HAS A QUESTION.
TOP LEFT.
>> WHAT'S YOUR QUESTION.
>> I DID NOT.
>> OKAY.
WE NEED A MOTION TO APPROVE THE
OPERATING PROCEDURES.
>> SO MOVED.
>> I SEE A SECOND.
AGAIN, KELLY HAS IT IN THE CHAT
SO VOTE ON THE OPERATING
PROCEDURES.
NEXT I WILL SAY A FEW WORDS
ABOUT THE EARLY CONCURRENCE
PROCESS ALSO KNOWN AS THE
EXPEDITED PROCESS.
SO I MENTION THAT IT ALLOWS OUR
GRANTS MANAGEMENT BRANCH TO GET
AWARDS OUT THE DOOR SOONER SO
THE PROJECTS CAN GET STARTED
EARLIER AND IT USUALLY FOCUSES
ON RO1s WITH SCORES WITHIN THE
PAY LINE AND A FEW OTHER TYPES
OF APPLICATIONS THAT HAVE NO
ISSUES THAT NEED TO BE RESOLVED
PRIOR TO COUNCIL.
WE'LL TAKE THE TASK OF EARLY
CONCURRENCE AMONG COUNCIL
MEMBERS EVERY YEAR AND WASN'TED
TO -- WANTED TO THANK THOSE WHO
UNDERTOOK THE RESPONSIBILITY AND
THERE WERE APPLICATIONS TO BE
EXPEDITED.
I DON'T KNOW THE NUMBER ISSUED
BUT WE'RE AHEAD OF OUR USUAL
SCHEDULE WHICH MEANS ABOUT
TWO-THIRDS AND IT ALLOWS THE
PROJECTS TO GET STARTED EARLIER
THAN THEY WOULD OTHERWISE.
AS I SAY, EVERY COUNCIL ROUND
OUR ABILITY TO DO THE EARLY
CONCURRENCE IS A TESTAMENT TO
OUR GRANTS MANAGEMENT BRANCH.
THEY'RE JOBS HAVE BEEN DIFFICULT
DURING COVID.
IT'S GOTTEN WORSE BECAUSE WE'RE
UNDER A CONTINUING RESOLUTION.
THE BRANCH HAS ISSUED A LOT OF
GRANT AWARDS.
KELLY, CAN YOU TURN YOUR VIDEO
ON.
>> THE HIT THE GROUND RUNNING
AND I'LL JUST SAY SHE HAS MORE
THAN 20 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN
NIH POLICY AND GRANTS
INVESTIGATION.
SHE STARTED AT NIAID.
THEN SHE WENT TO THE STRAENL
CENTRAL OFFICE FOR POLICY AND
EXTRAMURAL RESEARCH
ADMINISTRATION AND RECENTLY
BEFORE COMING TO US SHE WAS AT
NCI.
DO I HAVE THE ORDER RIGHT?
GOOD.
DO YOU WANT TO SAY HELLO.
>> I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING
WITH YOU ALL AND SEEING WHAT
GOES ON IN THE NEXT COUPLE DAYS.
>> WE'RE GLAD YOU'RE HERE,
SHELLY.
YOU CAN READ BIOS UNDER THE
GENERAL INFORMATION TAB.
THERE'S IMPRESSIVE PEOPLE HERE
AND I ENCOURAGE TO YOU READ
ABOUT THEM.
MAY HAVE NOTICED THAT WE'RE
HIRING MORE PEOPLE.
SOME PEOPLE ARE LISTED AS
DEPARTING AND SOME ARE NEW
HIRES.
YOU MAY HAVE NOTICED WE'RE
HIRING MORE PEOPLE THIS ROUND
THAN ARE LEAVING THAT'S BECAUSE
OF THE INFUSION OF FUNDS FOR THE
BRAIN INITIATIVE, HEAL
INITIATIVE AND NATIONAL
ALZHEIMER'S INITIATIVE.
IN ORDER TO BE DOES GOOD
STEWARDS OF THE ADDITIONAL FUNDS
WE HAD TO EXPAND STAFF SOMEWHAT.
KELLY HAS ONE INTRODUCTION TO
MAKE.
>> LIKED TO INTRODUCE TIM LITON
AND ME COMES TO US WITH LOTS OF
EXTRAMURAL KNOWLEDGE AND
EXPERIENCE.
HE'S BEEN WITH NINDS SINCE 2013
HE'S WORKED IN OUR DIVISION OF
TRANSLATIONAL RESEARCH AND
RECENTLY OUR GRANTS MANAGEMENT
BRANCH.
HE'LL BE TAKING OVER A LOT OF MY
COUNCIL RESPONSIBILITIES AS I
TRANSITION BUT YOU'LL NOT GET
RID OF ME QUITE YET BUT I WANTED
TO INTRODUCE TIM WITH ALL OF YOU
SINCE HE'LL BE WORK CLOSELY WITH
COUNCIL AND PROBABLY START TO
GET E-MAILS FROM HIM SOON AND I
BELIEVE HE WAS GOING TO TURN ON
HIS CAMERA TO PUT A FACE WITH
THE NAME AND SAY HELLO.
>> THIS IS MY FACE.
I VERY MUCH AM LOOKING FORWARD
TO EVERYONE AND LIKE KELLY SAID
YOU'LL BE HEARING FROM ME A LOT
BUT KELLY WILL BE BESIDE ME SO
NOT TO WORRY.
>> I'LL SHOW HIM THE ROPES.
>> THANKS, TIM.
TIM WILL GRADUALLY BECOME THE
NEW KELLY THOUGH KELLY IS UNIQUE
AND IRREPLACEABLE AND SHE'LL BE
AROUND FOR QUITE A WHILE.
THE OTHER THING WE WANTED TO DO
TO END THIS SECTION IS THE
DIRECTOR OF OUR DIVISION OF
NEUROSCIENCE IS GOING TO SAY A
FEW WORDS ABOUT A LONG STANDING
MEMBER OF OUR STAFF WHAT IS
RETIRING.
>> THANKS, BOB.
I WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT ON BEHALF
OF THE DIVISION OF NEUROSCIENCE
THE DEPARTURE WITH THE MILESTONE
RETIREMENT FOR MAY WONG A LONG
STANDING IN OUR DIVISION AND MAY
WORKS AT THE NINDS FOR 13 YEARS.
SHE CAME TO US IN 2008 AND CAME
WITH EXTENSIVE EXPERIENCE FROM
THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE
OVERSAW A PORTFOLIO THAT
INCLUDED TUMOR VIROLOGY SO SHE
CAME IN AND HAS BEEN MANAGING
THE HIV/AIDS PORTFOLIO FOR NINDS
FOR ALL THIS TIME.
FOR ANY OF YOU WHO INTERACTED
WITH HER YOU KNOW SHE WAS
EXTREMELY QUIET AND RESERVED AND
NEVER WOULD HAVE ANNOUNCED
HERSELF OR SHOWN HER PICTURE ALL
OVER BUT SHE WAS AN AMAZING
STAFF MEMBER AND WANT TO
ACKNOWLEDGE ALL THE WORK SHE'S
DONE.
THERE'S A FULL WRITE UP OF HER
ACCOMPLISHMENTS IN THE LAST PAGE
OF THE ELECTRONIC COUNCIL PAGE
INTRODUCTIONS AND DEPARTURES.
SHE NOT ONLY WORKED WITH NINDS
AND MANAGING THE AIDS PORTFOLIO
A CONGRESSIONALLY MANDATED
PROGRAM WORKING ACROSS ALL THE
INSTITUTES THAT HAD THIS IN
THEIR MISSION AND I WANT TO
CONGRATULATE HER IF YOU'RE
WATCHING MAY CONGRATULATIONS ON
REACHING THAT MILESTONE AND
SETTING OUT NEW ADVENTURES.
THANK YOU.
>> I WANT TO SECOND EVERYTHING
SHE SAID.
MAY HAS CONTRIBUTED OVER TO THE
EXTRAMURAL PROGRAM AND WHEN I
QUESTIONED ANYTHING SHE HAS DONE
SHE'S ALWAYS RIGHT AND I'M
ALWAYS WRONG.
SHE'S REALLY GOOD.
LET'S MOVE ON.
I THINK IT'S BACK TO YOU,
WALTER.
>> YOU SHOULD INTRODUCE LIPSETT
AUDITORIUM.
THE CAMERA'S OFF.
>> LIPSETT AUDITORIUM IS A NEW
MEMBER OF COUNCIL WHO I THINK
WILL BE HERE A WHILE FOR REASONS
I DON'T UNDERSTAND.
IF YOU WANT TO TURN YOUR CAMERA
ON, YOU'RE WELCOME.
>> I'M WALTER KOROSHETZ AND A
PLEASURE TO DRIVER THE
DIRECTOR'S MESSAGE FOR THE 215th
MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COUNCIL
FOR NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF
NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS AND
STROKE.
I'LL TALK ABOUT GENERAL OVERALL
ISSUES AND THEN GO INTO SPECIFIC
ITEMS OF INTEREST THAT HAVE
OCCURRED OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF
MONTHS.
FIRST, DR. COLLINS HAS STEPPED
DOWN AS THE NIH DIRECTOR BUT
THINGS ARE GOING VERY SMOOTHLY.
DR. LARRY TABAK THE PREVIOUS
DEPUTY DIRECTOR TAKING OVER THE
HELM OF THE INSTITUTE ABLY
ASSISTED BY THE ACTING PRINCIPLE
DIRECTOR OF NIH AND TARA GOT A
START WORKING WITH AMY ADAMS AT
NINDS.
I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE BUDGET
AS I USUALLY DO TO START OFF.
WE'RE NOT IN ANY DIFFERENT PLACE
THAN WE LAST SPOKE.
WE ARE OPERATING UNDER A
CONTINUING RESOLUTION WHICH
MEANS WE HAVE THE SAME AMOUNT OF
MONEY AT LAST YEAR BUT THERE ARE
BUDGETS PROPOSED THAT GIVE
SIGNIFICANT INCREASES BUT
CURRENTLY WE DO NOT HAVE AN
APPROPRIATION AND WE HAD
ANALYZ
ANALYZED TO GET BY WITH A 14th
PERCENTILE AND WE STARTED THAT
AND THEN WE'LL HAVE SIGNIFICANT
BUDGETARY ISSUES TO DEAL WITH
COMING SOON.
WITH THE UNCERTAIN BUDGET CYCLE
MAKE MAINTAINING A PAY LINE
CHALLENGING AND TALK ABOUT WHAT
WE'VE DONE TO STAY ABOVE THE 14
PERCENTILE.
AND GOING BELOW IS WHEN OTHER
OPTIONS HAVE BEEN EXHAUSTED AND
WE HAVE A STEADY AND PREDICTABLE
PAY LINE.
IF HOWEVER, WE'RE UNDER A
LONG-TERM CONTINUING RESOLUTION
WE'LL HAVE TO TAKE STRONG STEPS
TO MAINTAIN THE 14% AND WE CAN
HOLD OFF ON AWARDS UNTIL FY23 OR
IF WE GET A BUDGET IN 2022.
AHOLDING OFF ON LONG TERM TRIALS
AND MOVE THEM TO NO-KAU HNO-COST
EXTENSIONS AND TRAIN
NON-COMPETING GRANTS WHETHER
THEY'RE NEW GRANTS OR CONTINUING
GRANTS WILL SEE A CUT AND WE'RE
HOPING IT WON'T HAPPEN BUT WE
HAVE TO PLAN FOR THE
CONTINGENCY.
WE'RE IN A CONTINUING RESOLUTION
WHICH CURRENTLY EXPIRES FEBRUARY
18.
I LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING IF WE
GET A BUDGET AFTER THAT.
I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE BUDGET.
IT'S SEPARATED INTO DIFFERENT
DU
BUCKETS FOR THE INVESTIGATOR
INITIATED GRANTS AND AWARDS AND
WE HAVE SIGNIFICANT FUNDS THAT
HAVE COME IN FOR PROGRAMS SUCH
AS THE BRAIN INITIATIVE WITH THE
21st CENTURY CURES AND INCREASE
TO THE BASE BUDGET.
THEN THE HEAL INITIATIVE HELPING
TO END ADDITION LONG-TERM WHICH
CAME TO US FROM CONGRESS TO
PROMOTE BETTER MANAGEMENT OF
PAIN IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF
NON-ADDICTIVE PAIN MEDICINES AND
WE HAVE THE INTRAMURAL BUDGET
AND BUDGET FOR THE PERSONNEL AND
THEN THERE'S MONEY WHICH IS
TARGETED BY CONGRESS FOR SMALL
BUSINESS GRANTS.
THAT'S WHAT OUR BUDGET LOOKS
LIKE.
IN 2007 WE HAD A TOUGH TIME WIN
THE PAY LINE DROPPING AND AFTER
THAT THE WHOLE NINDS EXTRAMURAL
STAFF HAVE CUT THINGS UNTIL WE
CAN GET OUR PAY LINE BACK TO 14%
OR 15%.
THIS BIG INCREASE CAME WITH THE
DOUBLING OF THE BUDGET AND WE
WERE FLAT BETWEEN 2004 AND 2016
AND ABLE TO MAINTAIN OUR PAY
LINE WITH INCREASING GRANTS
COMING IN 2017 WE HAD A PROBLEM.
WE HAD TO REDUCE IT AND MADE A
LOT OF BACK UP BY POSTPONING
GRANT PAYMENTS SO 2018 AND
BETWEEN 2016 AND 2018 WE'RE
SEEING SIGNIFICANT INCREASES TO
OUR BASE BUDGET EVERY YEAR.
NOW, THERE WERE, AS I MENTIONED,
INCREASES TO PARTICULAR AREAS OF
SCIENCE.
ONE IS THE FUNDS THAT WE
ADMINISTERED FROM THE NATIONAL
INSTITUTE OF AGES FOR
ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE RELATED
DEMENTIAS AND LEWY BODY DISEASE
AND THE BRAIN INITIATIVE AND THE
HEAL INITIATIVE.
THOSE ARE SUBSTANTIAL
PROPORTIONS NOW OF OUR BUDGET
BASE BUDGET BEING SEEN IN BLUE.
IF YOU LOOK OVER TIME YOU SEE AN
INCREASE AND IF YOU CONVERT YOU
DON'T SEE ANY CHANGE AT ALL.
THIS INCREASE IS ACTUALLY DUE TO
INFLATION.
WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO FUND MORE
GRANTS AS WE GOT INCREASES
STARTING IN 2016.
AND WE HAVE ALSO TRIED TO LOOK
CAREFULLY TO THE PROPORTION OF
WHAT WE CALL TOP-DOWN SOLICITED
MANAGING PROGRAMS IN OUR BASE
FUNDING VERSUS OUR INVESTIGATION
INITIATED RESEARCH PROJECTS.
YOU CAN SEE WE'VE BEEN CONSTANT
IN TRYING TO KEEP THAT BALANCE
AROUND 65% TO 70% OF
INVESTIGATOR INITIATE AND THE
TRAINING GRANTS UP HERE AND
ACTIVELY MANAGED PROGRAMS IN THE
LIGHT BLUE.
THE QUESTIONS THERE COUNCIL IS
THE 14% THE LINE IN THE SAND IS
THAT THE RIGHT STRATEGY OR ARE
THERE OTHER METRICS WE SHOULD BE
USING AND MAYBE THE NUMBER OF
AWARDS OPPOSED TO PERCENTILE AND
THE NUMBER OF INVESTIGATORS.
I'D LIKE TO PAUSE HERE UNCASE
ANYONE HAS QUESTIONS FOR ANY
COMMENTS.
>> IF ANYONE HAS PARTICULAR
QUESTIONS AND HATS OFF TO
CHRISTINE AND BRYAN FOR DOING
THE ANALYSES.
TIM.
>> WALTER, WITH RESPECT TO THE
LAST QUESTION ABOUT KEEPING A
FIXED PAY LINE VERSUS OTHER
METRICS, THERE MUST BE DATA FROM
OTHER INSTITUTES AND I REALIZE
THEY'VE ALL HAD THEIR OWN
FLAVOR.
MAYBE NINDS IS THE LATEST
COMPARISON BECAUSE IT'S NEURO
RELATED.
I'M WONDERING, YOU MUST HAVE AN
IMPRESSION OF HOW WELL IT WORKS
OVER THERE.
>> RIGHT.
I THINK IT'S A PHILOSOPHICAL
DIFFERENCE WHERE WE RELY ON
STUDY SECTION PRIMARILY AND WAS
NIMH FUND TO THE BEST 10% AND
THEN PICK AND CHOOSE BETWEEN 10
AND 20.
I THINK THERE'S AS MUCH BIAS
GOING TO PICKING AND CHOOSING WE
HAVEN'T REALLY DONE THAT ACCEPT
WE HAVE PUT ASIDE A CERTAIN
AMOUNT OF MONEY EACH YEAR
USUALLY ONE OR ONE AND A HALF
PERCENTILE POINT WORTH OF MONEY
INTO WHAT WE CALL HIGH PROGRAM
PRIORITY GRANTS.
OUR PICKING AND CHOOSING WE FUND
UP TO THE PAY LINE AND THEN
MAYBE ANOTHER PAY LINE OR TWO,
PAY LINE POINTS ABOVE THAT.
>> I THINK IT WAS NEURO RELATED
ARE THERE OTHER INSTITUTES THAT
DON'T HAVE SUBJECTIVE PROGRAM
DECISIONS SERVICE ANOTHER METRIC
OTHER THAN A HARD PAY LINE.
IT MAKES IT OBJECTIVE BUT NOT
BASED PURELY WITH A LINE IN THE
SAND.
>> SOME INSTITUTES HAVE GIGANTIC
TOP-DOWN PROGRAMS AND THEIR PAY
LINES DROP BELOW 10%.
NCI IS A GOOD EXAMPLE WHERE THEY
HAD THE MOST OF ANY INSTITUTE
BUT THEIR PAY LINES ARE POOR AND
SIMILARLY WITH NIAID.
THEY HAVE THEIR RATIONALE IS
THEY'RE RUNNING MASSIVE CENTER
FOR X, Y AND Z.
THEY'RE VERY DIFFERENT THAN WE
ARE.
EVERYBODY'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT.
WE CAN DO WHAT WE THINK IS BEST
FOR OUR SCIENCE.
SO I MENTIONED IN 2007 WE
THOUGHT THAT CAN'T -- BEFORE
THAT IT SEEMED AS THE PAY LINE
WAS THE DEFAULT.
YOU HAD ALL THESE PROJECTS FROM
THE DOUBLING AND EVERYONE'S ALL
EXCITE AND NO ONE REALLY WORRIED
ABOUT THE PAY LINE THAT MUCH AND
THEN WE GOT INTO TOUGH TIMES.
AND IF YOU GO BELOW 14 IS NOT
FIXED.
THAT'S WHERE WE THINK SHOULD BE
THE FLOOR AT THIS POINT.
BUT SOME PEOPLE HAVE OTHER
THOUGHTS.
>> THERE ARE INSTITUTES WITH
LOWER PAY LINES THAN OURS.
WALTER MENTIONED NCI AND
INSTITUTES WITH HIGHER PAY LINES
THAN OURS.
ONE IS NIGMS TRYING TO KEEP THE
PAY LINES IN THE 20s AND I THINK
GENE IS NEXT.
>> YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO SAY
THAT ONE THING YOU SAID IN THE
REPORT THAT STRUCK ME IS THE
COST OF DOING RESEARCH HASN'T
RISEN WITH INFLATION BUT THAT
CANNOT BE TRUE IT'S RISEN
BECAUSE EVERYBODY'S SALARIES
GOES UP A LITTLE BIT EVERY YEAR.
IT MUST BE THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE
LIKE ME ARE STILL APPLYING FOR
GRANTS IN A MODULAR FORM AND
JUST DOING LESS WITH THE SAME
AMOUNT OF MONEY SO I'M NOT
PROPOSING THAT WE CHANGE THE
MODULAR FORMAT NECESSARILY BUT
FOR THE FIRST TIME IN MY 23
YEARS OF HAVING A GRANT, I'M
GOING TO BE APPLYING FOR A
NON-MODULAR BUDGET GRANT BECAUSE
IT'S A NOT POSSIBLE TO NOT DO
ANYTHING.
>> SO THAT'S INTERESTING BECAUSE
WE'VE HAD A DISCUSSION ABOUT
THAT WITHIN THE INSTITUTE.
WE AGREE THAT 250 IS NOT -- IT
HASN'T CHANGED WHEREAS
INFLATION'S CHANGED DRAMATICALLY
AND THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THE
PROPORTION OF PEOPLE WHO GET
MODULAR GRANTS HAVE SHRUNK FROM
70% OR 80% TO BELOW 20% NOW.
WE'D LIKE TO HAVE NIH CHANGE THE
MODULAR GRANT AND THERE'S BEEN
RESISTANCE TO THAT AND THERE'S
ONE OPTION FOR THE FUTURE WHERE
WE HAVE TWO DIFFERENT PAY LINES.
ONE PAY LINE FOR GRANTS ABOVE X.
ONE THAT WOULD BE BELOW X LESS
STRINGENT.
WHAT X IS IS A GOOD QUESTION BUT
IT WOULD BE SOMEWHERE AROUND
350K.
THAT'S ANOTHER WAY WE WOULD
POTENTIALLY PLAY SO THAT BASIC
PAY LINE OF WHATEVER IT IS,
$350K, $375K WOULD BE SET AND
THE PAY LINE FOR THINGS ABOVE
THE GRANTS ABOVE THAT AMOUNT
MIGHT FLUCTUATE.
THAT'S ANOTHER OPTION WE'VE BEEN
DISCUSSING.
>> THANKS TO WALTER HAVE GONE UP
AND HE HAS ELIMINATED THE CUT ON
MODULAR GRANTS AND WE STILL HAVE
A 17.5%.
I THINK ALLEN IS NEXT.
>> I THINK GINA IS NEXT.
>> I KNOW THE R35s ARE ONLY FIVE
YEARS AND OFTEN FUND FOUR YEARS.
I DMOT SUGGEST WE EVER CHANGE
THAT BUT IS THAT PART OF THE
REASON THEY CAN FUND THEIR PAY
LINES DIFFERENT?
>> NO.
I THINK WHAT THEY TEND TO DO IS
CAP PEOPLE AROUND 750 AND DON'T
LET THEM GO ABOVE.
THAT'S THE BIGGEST THING THEY
CAN DO TO FUND MORE GRANTS.
OF COURSE THEY DON'T HAVE
CLINICAL TRIALS.
>> 250 AS A MODULAR GRANT IS
DIFFERENT WITH THE IT WILL RAY
VERSUS NOT AND WONDER IF IT IS
CONCEIVABLE TO HAVE SEPARATE
TRACKS FOR 250 PLUS THE SALARY
VERSUS 250 STRAIGHT ACROSS.
OR ALTERNATIVELY HAVE OTHER
STREAMS OF FUNDING TO SUPPORT
SALARY FOR PRINCIPLE
INVESTIGATORS ONCE THEY'RE
PASSED THE K SERIES.
OVER.
>> I THINK THAT COULD BE ILLEGAL
BUT WE CAN CHECK WITH THE
LAWYERS.
>> THE PROBLEM WITH CLINICIANS
SHARE OFTEN OVER THE SALARY CAP
ANYWAY AND HAVE TO DO THE COST
SHARE FOR THE ADDITIONAL AMOUNT.
IT WOULD BE CONFUSING TO HAVE
ANYTHING BESIDES EFFORT AND HARD
TO TRACK PER SENT EFFORT IF IT'S
NOT TIED TO THE SALARY.
>> LET'S SEE HOW THINGS GO.
WE HAVE HEARD THEY'RE WORKING ON
A BUDGET AND BUT WITH A
LONG-TERM C.R. WE'LL HAVE TO DO
SOMETHING, LONG TERM MEANING THE
REST OF THE YEAR.
IF WE GET A BUDGET IN APRIL AND
MAY AND THERE'S INCREDIBLE WORK
BY THE STAFF TO MAKE SURE WE PUT
INTO THAT AND GET IT OUT THE
DOOR BY THE END OF THE PHYSICAL
YEAR.
IF YOU'RE IN A CONTINUING
RESOLUTION YOU DON'T GET YOUR
FULL GRANT MONEY.
THE GOVERNMENT WITHHOLDS 10% SO
WHEN YOU GET THE BUDGET THEN
THEY RELEASE THE 10% AND SO AND
SO SOME INSTITUTES WILL RELEASE
10% OR 8% AND THAT'S A WAY OF
BEING ABLE TO MAKE IT THROUGH
THE YEAR.
THOSE ARE THE POSSIBILITIES IN A
FULL CR.
ANY OTHER CREATIVE IDEAS?
MORE LEGAL CREATIVE IDEAS WILL
BE FINE.
>> DETAILS, DETAILS, DETAILS.
>> LAWYERS, LAWYERS, LAWYERS.
I'M NOT PEJORATIVE AT ALL.
TWO OF MY KIDS ARE LAWYERS.
WHY DON'T WE START UP THE REST
OF THE MESSAGE.
>> I WANT TO MOVE TO A COUPLE OF
THE HIGH PRIORITY ISSUES.
ONE IS THE HEAL INITIATIVE
HELPING TO END ADDICTION LONG
TERM AND THAT WAS BORN OUT OF
THE EPIDEMIC REALLY OF OPIOID
OVERDOSE DEATHS AND IN THE
BEGINNING THEY WERE PRIMARILY
DUE TO PRESCRIPTION DRUGS BEING
PRESCRIPTION OPIOIDS LEADING TO
OVERDOSE DEATHS THEN STARTING IN
2017, FENTANYL STARTED TO COME
IN THE MARKET AND THE OPIOID
DEATHS NOW ARE MORE DUE TO
FENTANYL THAN TO PRESCRIPTION
OPIOIDS AND HOW WE STARTED OFF
THE PROBLEM AND IT STILL IS A
PROBLEM.
THE HEAL INITIATIVE HAS A
COMPONENT IN TERMS OF IMPROVING
THE MANAGEMENT OF CHRONIC PAIN
AND REDUCING THE RISK OF OPIOID
DISORDER.
LOOKING FORWARD TO THE FY22
BUDGET PROPOSED BUT NOT YET
ENACTED, CONGRESS AND IN
MULTIPLE BUDGETS HAVE INDICATED
THEY WOULD LIKE TO INCREASE THE
NINDS BUDGET FOR PAIN RESEARCH
BY $43 MILLION IN '22.
WE'RE NOT THE ONLY INSTITUTE.
THERE'S MULTIPLE OTHERS THAT ARE
ALSO SEEING THE INCREASE AND SO
WHAT WE HAVE DONE IS WE HAVE NOT
KNOWING THAT WE'RE GOING TO GET
THE MONEY HAVE ISSUED A NOTICE
OF SPECIAL INTEREST FOR MOST
ASPECTS OF THE NINDS PAIN
PORTFOLIO ENCOURAGING PEOPLE TO
COME IN AND IMPORTANT TO NOTE A
HEADACHE IS INCLUDED IN PAIN AND
A HEADACHE IS PAINFUL AND IT'S
DEFINITELY A DISORDER WITHIN THE
HEAL INITIATIVE.
WE ALSO HAVE ADMINISTRATIVE
SUPPLEMENTS BY FUNDING
INVESTIGATORS IN OTHER FIELDS OF
SCIENCE AND WE'RE PREPARED GIVEN
THE BUDGETS WE'VE SEEN FROM THE
PRESIDENT, HOW'S AND SENATE BUT
DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN DO THIS OR
HOW MUCH UNTIL WE GET AN
APPROPRIATION.
THERE'S ALSO $135 MILLION IN
THESE BUDGETS FOR THE HEAL
INITIATIVE ADDITIONAL MONEY AND
HERE WE HAVE PUT OUT FOAs OR
TRAINING AND CAREER DEVELOPMENT
PARTICULARLY IN CLINICAL PAIN
RESEARCH AND MYOFASCIAL PAIN AND
HEALTH EQUITY IN PAIN AND
INTEGRATION OF JOINT SURROUNDING
TISSUES, MAJOR CAUSE OF PAIN.
THEY'RE ALL OUT THERE AND WE'RE
EXCITED BY THE ABILITY TO FUND
THESE THINGS SHOULD THE
APPROPRIATIONS COME THROUGH.
NOW I WANT TO MOVE TO COVID AND
THE PERSISTENT AFFECTS OF COVID.
AND AS YOU KNOW, COVID HAS
AFFECTED MANY DIFFERENT TISSUES
IN THE BODY, ORGANS IN THE BODY
AND UNFORTUNATELY PEOPLE WHO ARE
NOW BEING AFFECTED A CERTAIN
PROPORTION ARE SUFFERING FROM
PERSISTENT SYMPTOMS.
FATIGUE IS THE MAJOR ONE
AFFECTING MOST PEOPLE HAVING
PERSISTENT SYMPTOMS.
SOME WE THINK HAVE POST-EXERTION
MALAISE WHICH IS A TYPE OF
MYELITIS AND ANXIETY,
DEPRESSION, SLEEP DISORDER,
COGNITIVE DYSFUNCTION AND
CHRONIC KIDNEY DISEASE AND A
HOST OF THINGS TO SEE WHAT WE
CAN DO TO STEM THIS INCREASE OF
REALLY MULTI-SYSTEM DISORDER DUE
TO PAST COVID.
TO THE RECOVERY INITIATIVE IS AN
AMBITIOUS PROJECT TO REALLY
UNDERSTAND WHAT ARE THE
BIOLOGICAL DRIVERS FOR THE
PERSISTENT SYMPTOMS AND THEN
ALSO WHAT CAN WE DO TO ACTUALLY
ATTENUATE THE SYMPTOMS OR EVEN
TREAT PEOPLE THAT DON'T GET THE
PERSISTENT LONG-TERM COVID
SYMPTOMS.
THE INITIATIVE IS ENROLLING
THOUSANDS OF PATIENTS, SOME ARE
ACUTELY INFECTED AND SEE HOW
THEY RECOVER OVER TIME.
SOME ARE NOW MONTHS AFTER THEIR
ACUTE INFECTION.
SOME WITH PERSISTENT SYMPTOMS
AND OTHER CONTROLS WHO HAD COVID
BUT NO PERSISTENT SYMPTOMS WE
CAN COMPARE TO.
THERE'S ALSO A LARGE ELECTRONIC
HEALTH RECORD COHORT BEING PUT
TOGETHER AND AN AUTOPSY COHORT
UNDER THE MICROSCOPE FOR PEOPLE
THAT HAVE DIED AND LOOKING FOR
IMMUNE ACTIVATION GOING ON IN
THE BODY AND THINGS YOU CAN ONLY
SEE UNDER THE MICROSCOPE.
I WANT MENTION A NEW ISSUE WHICH
IS ALONGING PAST COVID, HOW IS
OUR WORK AT NINDS GOING TO BE
DONE IN THE NEW ERA?
LOOK AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE
WORKFORCE AND WORK WILL HAVE TO
BE RE-IMAGINED AND RESTRUCTURED
BASED ON EXPERIENCE WITH
TELEWORK DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC.
AND WE'RE DOING OKAY AND NOW
COVID HITS WHAT CHANGES WE HAVE
TO KEEP AN EYE ON TO DECENT TO
CHANGE.
AND IMPROVE INTEGRATION INTO THE
COMMUNITIES THAT SHARE OUR
MISSION.
HOW CAN NINDS RESEARCH INFORM
THE CHANGES IN MEDICINE AND
SCIENCE AND WHAT NEW
OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES IN
THE FUTURE ARE COMING IN THIS
NEW WORK ENVIRONMENT.
AND THERE'S CHANGES IN THE WAY
TRAINING AND MENTORING ARE GOING
TO BE APPROACHED IN THE NEW
HYBRID ENVIRONMENT.
REALLY LOOKING FOR YOUR ADVICE
I'M SURE YOU'RE ALL STRUGGLING
WITH THE SAME ISSUE AND
HOPEFULLY YOU DON'T FALL OFF THE
CLIFF.
WE CERTAINLY WILL NOT.
THE NEXT ISSUE I WANTED TO BRING
UP IS A BILL SIGNED IN DECEMBER
FUNDING GRANTS FOR SCIENTIFIC
RESEARCH ON SCLEROSIS THAT
UTILIZES EXPANDED ACCESS DATA
FROM INDIVIDUALS NOT OTHERWISE
ELIGIBLE FOR CLINICAL TRIALS.
IT'S LIMITED TO PHASE 3 CLINICAL
TRIAL SITES AND ESTABLISHES A
PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP TO
FOCUS ON ADVANCING SCIENTIFIC
RESEARCH THAT WILL SUPPORT AND
ACCELERATE DEVELOPMENT AND
REVIEW OF DRUGS FOR ALS.
IT WILL ANALYZE THE IMPACT OF
PROGRAM IN FOUR YEARS AND
AUTHORIZED FOR $100 MILLION AND
A GRANT PROGRAM EVERY YEAR BUT
AGAIN WE DON'T HAVE AN
APPROPRIATION AT THIS TIME.
AND ALS THE COMMONED FUND THIS
IS THE DIRECTOR'S FUND, STARTED
A TRANSFORMATIVE RESEARCH
PROJECT IN ALS AND THIS
INITIATIVE SUPPORTING HIGH RISK,
HIGH REWARD ALS SUPPORT.
FOUR NEW AWARDS WERE MADE IN
2021 AND WE'VE HAD A POINT
PERSON IN THIS PUBLIC HEALTH.
WE ARE EMBARKING ON A STRATEGIC
PLANNING EFFORT IN ACCELERATING
RESEARCH ON THE BIOLOGY BEHIND
ALS.
WE LEARNED A LOT BUT STILL DON'T
HAVE ENOUGH KNOWLEDGE TO BE
REALLY CONFIDENT ABOUT NEW
TREATMENTS THAT ARE GOING TO BE
HIGHLY EFFECTIVE TO PATIENTS.
WE WANT TO OPTIMIZE THE CLINICAL
RESEARCH AND IMPROVE THE QUALITY
OF LIFE IN AND IDENTIFY
COLLABORATION AND PARTNERSHIP
OPPORTUNITIES.
WE'RE HAPPY TO HAVE BOB BROWN
AND OTHERS LEADING THE TRAFFIC
PLAN WORK GROUP RAN BY OUR TEAM
AND CHRISTINE FROM THE OFFICE OF
SCIENCE POLICY AND PLANNING.
AND WE'LL INCLUDE PERSONS LIVING
WITH ALS AND CAREGIVERS.
LOOK FORWARD TO THAT AND THANKS
TO THE WORKING GROUP.
THE PROBLEM IS THAT WE HAVE
INCLUDE PARTICULARLY FROM THE
GENETIC CAUSES BUT STILL A LOT
OF UNKNOWNS FACING US WE HAVE TO
ACROSS THAT VALLEY BEFORE WE CAN
GET EFFECTIVE TREATMENTS AND
THAT REQUIRES FUNDAMENTAL
NEUROSCIENCE TO FILLING IN THOSE
GAPS.
SPEAKING OF, THIS IS TO LOOK AT
WHAT WE CAN DO TO ENHANCE THE
BASIC NEUROSCIENCE NOT DISEASE
OR MECHANISM OF DISEASE
RESEARCH, HOW CAN WE STRENGTHEN
THAT?
WE HAVE REQUEST FOR INFORMATION
OUT AND FORMING A WORKING GROUP
AND LET US KNOW IF ANY COUNCIL
MEMBERS WOULD BE INTERESTED IN
THE PROJECT.
THE BRAIN INITIATIVE WAS A GREAT
EXAMPLE OF A PROJECT THAT REALLY
ENHANCED OUR ABILITY TO DO BASIC
RESEARCH IN NEUROSCIENCE BUT IT
WAS CERTAINLY AND IT IS
CERTAINLY CONFINED TO A
PARTICULAR TYPE OF CIRCUIT
NEUROSCIENCE.
I WANT TO TALK ABOUT OUR WORK IN
INCREASING DIVERSITY, EQUITY AND
INCLUSION AND YOU SEE THE UNITE
INITIATIVE.
IT'S A MULTI-PRONGED ATTEMPT TO
IMPROVE OUR WORKFORCE AND
IMPROVE OUR DIVERSE PERSPECTIVES
IN SCIENCE.
THERE'S MULTIPLE PROJECTS GOING
ON IN A COORDINATED FASHION.
THERE'S DR. MARIE BERNARD WHO
PUT TOGETHER A STRATEGIC PLAN.
THERE'S THE UNITE INITIATIVE AND
NINDS AND WE'LL WORK WITH
DR. BERNARD TO DEVELOP OUR OWN
ETHNIC AND EQUITY PLAN AND ALL
THESE WILL BE TARGETED TO
DEVELOP OVERALL NIH DIVERSITY,
EQUITY AND INCLUSION STRATEGIC
PLAN.
THERE'S A LOT OF WORK GOING ON
AND IN A COORDINATED FASHION.
MARIE BERNARD THE CHIEF OFFICER
OF THE SCIENTIFIC WORKFORCE
DIVERSITY WAS AT THE NATIONAL
AGING INSTITUTE AND ALSO WORKING
ON A STRATEGIC PLAN AND PUT IT
TOGETHER AND LOOKING FOR
FEEDBACK AND YOU CAN SEE THE
LINK HERE YOU SEE IDEAS HOW TO
ESTABLISH IT AND PREPARE
LEADERSHIP AND INFRASTRUCTURE
AND GOALS AND FOCUS AREAS AND
STAKEHOLDERS AND THEN MANAGE AND
EXECUTE THE PLAN.
SO MARIE IS A VERY CLEAR
THINKER, REALLY BUILDS CENSUS
AND EXCITED TO WORK WITH HER AND
HAS BEEN.
THE NIH STRATEGIC PLAN IS IN
RESPONSE TO A CALL FROM THE
DIRECTOR FROM THE GRASS ROOT
EFFORT IT AND CHANGES FOR EQUITY
PUT TOGETHER BY NIH GROUP AND
THE EXECUTIVE ORDER TO BUILD AN
NIH-WIDE DEIA STRATEGIC PLAN.
INSTITUTES WILL BE INVOLVED AND
IMPROVING THE SCIENTIFIC
WORKFORCE AND IN TERMS OF THE
EXTRAMURAL COMMUNITY AND UNITE
RECOMMENDATIONS ARE STILL COMING
UP FOR APPROVAL AT THE HIGH ELF
LEVELS BUT WE'RE LOOKING AT
INCREASING CAREER OPPORTUNITIES
FOR UNDER REPRESENTED GROUPS.
SOME EXAMPLES ARE THINGS WE'LL
TALK ABOUT AND LOOKING TO
IDENTIFY AND CHANGE THE NIH
PROCESSES AND POLICIES THAT
CONTRIBUTE TO INEQUITIES AND
ALONG AND SUSTAIN RESEARCH
CAPACITY AT MINORITY SERVING
INSTITUTIONS AND PROMOTING
CULTURE CHANGE AND EXPORTIVE
INCLUSIVITY AND EQUITY.
ONE EXAMPLE ONE OF THE PICTURES
AT THE NIH LOOK LIKE THE SAME
GUY WITH A DIFFERENT HAIRDO AND
THERE WAS A DIFFERENT IDEA TO
SHOW WE ARE A DIVERSE GROUP AND
SUCCESS IS A PROBLEM SOLVED BY
ALL OF US.
IT'S BEING DISTRIBUTED AROUND
NIH TO BALANCE THE PORTRAITS YOU
SEE ON THE LEFT.
WE'VE HAD A PROBLEM IN OUR
GRANTEES AND AFRICAN AMERICAN
WERE A PORTION AND WHITE
HISPANICS ONLY 4% AND AND WE
HAVE A LONG WAY TO GO.
THE SUCCESSION RATE IS THE SAME
FOR BLACK AFRICAN AMERICAN
VERSUS WHITES.
WE DO NEED TO ATTRACT MORE
PEOPLE TO OUR INSTITUTE AND SHE
RUNS THE PROGRAM TO ENHANCE
WORKFORCE DIVERSITY AND INCREASE
APPLICATIONS TO UNDER
REPRESENTED GROUPS AND ATTRACT
INVESTIGATORS TO NEUROSCIENCE
AND NEUROSCIENCE IS GREAT
WHETHER IT'S NINDS NORT AND LOOK
TO HELP BUILD NEUROSCIENCE IN
GENERAL IN MICHELLE'S GROUP.
TRAINING AND CAPACITY BUILDING
ARE BIG COMPONENTS OF WHAT SHE
DOES.
AND MICHELLE IS GETTING DOWN AND
TRACKING METRICS IN OPEN
FASHION.
ONE PROGRAM MICHELLE STARTED IN
2009 AND THIS FUNDS TENURE TRACK
FACULTY.
AND THERE'S MENTORING AND
TRAINING AND FROM 2009 TO 2017
THERE WERE AWARDEES ALL
SUBMITTED RO1s AND 17 SECURED
THEM ALREADY AND SEVERAL ARE
PENDING REVIEWS.
WE THINK THIS CAN MAKE A
DIFFERENCE.
WE ALSO HAVE THE LANGUAGE OF
DR. JOHN NGAI PUT TOGETHER FOR
BRAIN INITIATIVE FOAs.
THEY HAVE TO SUBMIT A PLAN FOR
DIVERSE PERSPECTIVES AS PART OF
THEIR APPLICATION.
THIS IS I THINK GOING TO BE
VALUABLE AND WE ARE GOING TO
INCLUDE IT IN SOME OF OUR OTHER
NINDS SPECIFIC FOAs GOING
FORWARD.
I WANT TO BRING YOUR TO THE NIH
FIRST PROGRAM.
AND THEY'LL HAVE FUNDS TO HIRE
PEOPLE FROM DIVERSE BACKGROUNDS
AS COHORTS WHO CAN BE MENTORED
TOGETHER AND BAND TOGETHER TO BE
SUCCESSFUL IN THEIR NEW
INSTITUTIONS.
THE SECOND ANNOUNCEMENT IS ALSO
IN REVIEW AND I BELIEVE THERE'S
A THIRD ONE COMING DOWN THE LINE
SO OF COURSE WE'RE INTERESTED AT
THE INSTITUTIONS WHO ARE FUNDED
HERE WILL RECRUIT NEUROSCIENCE
INVESTIGATORS AS PART OF THE
FIRST AWARDS.
YOU'LL BE HEARING FROM
DR. RICHARD BENSON ON OUR
STRATEGIC PLAN FOR IMPROVING
HEALTH EQUITY.
THIS IS PART OF THE UNITE BUT
CENTRAL TO NINDS AND THAT WAS
THE NAME OF THE WORKSHOP SEEING
WHAT WE CAN DO TEST
INTERVENTIONS TO MAKE A
DIFFERENCE IN IMPROVING HEALTH
EQUITY IN OUR COUNTRY AND WE
HAVE SO MANY EXAMPLES WE FUNDED
OVER THE YEARS TO SHOW HEALTH,
NEUROLOGIC HEALTH IS NOT
EQUITABLY DISTRIBUTED IN OUR
COUNTRY.
WE MADE STRIDES IN STROKE
THERAPY REVOLUTIONIZED AND THE
TRIALS IN INTRAARTERIAL THERAPY
AND WHAT HAPPENS TO YOU WHEN
HAVE YOU A STROKE.
IT DEPENDS ON YOUR RACIAL AND
ETHNIC BACKGROUND AND WHERE YOU
LIVE.
SO RICHARD AND THERE'S A
WORKSHOP WITH PROFESSIONAL
ADVOCACY ORGANIZATIONS IN STROKE
TO COME TOGETHER AND DEVELOP
SOLUTIONS HOW STROKE CARE CAN BE
ADMINISTERED MORE EQUITABLY IN
THE UNITED STATES AND DAVID
SATTURE HAS AGREED TO GIVE THE
OPENING REMARKS.
WHEN YOU GO THROUGH A TOUGH
YEAR, COVID CERTAINLY MADE 2021
A TOUGH YEAR, THERE'S NOTHING
LIKE LOOKING BACK AND SEEING
WHAT THE CONFERENCES WERE
DESPITE THE TROUBLES.
SO PERSEVERANCE WAS THE NAME MY
DIRECTOR'S MESSAGE AND THANKS TO
THE FOLKS AND THE DIRECTOR FOR
PUTTING THESE TOP 10 LISTS
TOGETHER.
OF COURSE, THE TOP 100 BUT
THAT'S NOT GOING FIT ON A SLIDE
AND SO MUCH HAPPENED IN '21 SO
LOOKING FORWARD TO A BETTER 2022
MEANS THERE'LL BE EVEN GREATER
ADVANCES COMING.
I WANT TO THANK YOU AND DISCUSS
ANY ISSUES WE TALKED ABOUT
TODAY.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> PERHAPS WE CAN TAKE THE
SLIDES DOWN NOW.
>> I HAVE A QUESTION ON THE
DIVERSITY STATEMENT AND I CAN
FIND OUT FROM A NEIGHBOR I PUT
THIS IN AND FLIED THROUGH AND
USED THE SAME ONE AND I'M JUST
WONDERING IF IT WOULD BE
APPROPRIATE TO SAY THESE ARE THE
ACTIONS TO IMPLEMENT THE THINGS
I SAID I'D DO WITH RESPECT TO MY
DIVERSITY STATEMENT BECAUSE IF
IT'S ONE UP TIME UP FRONT YOU
SAY THIS IS THE PLAN I DON'T
THINK THERE'LL BE A GREAT
CONSEQUENCE.
>> AS TIME GOES ON IF THERE'S
ANY COMMENTS LOOKING AT REPORTS
IN THIS AREA.
>> SO WALTER IF I MAY WEIGH IN.
IT'S A GREAT POINT.
BRAIN HAS BEEN SPEARHEADING THIS
AND WE HAVE A ROLL OUT TEAM AND
THAT TEAM IS FOCUSSING ON
EVALUATION.
SO WE WILL BE LOOKING AT THIS IN
PROGRESS REPORTS.
WE DON'T WANT THIS TO BE A
BOILER POINT PEOPLE USE.
I SHOULD ALSO REMIND, THE PLAN
SUPPOSED TO BE INCORPORATED
THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE
APPLICATION.
THE PDP SHOULD BE USED AS A VIM
FOR HOW ENHANCED DIVERSE
PERSPECTIVES WILL FURTHER THE
SCIENCE.
THIS IS A WORK IN PROGRESS AND
WE'RE AWARE OF THE ISSUES AND
GLAD YOU BROUGHT IT UP BUT OUR
EVALUATION TEAM IS LOOKING AT
HOW TO STRUCTURE SINCE A WAY
THAT WILL BE PRODUCTIVE AND IN A
WAY WE CAN USE IT AS A TOOL TO
HELP PEOPLE MOVE THIS NEEDLE A
BIT FORWARD.
>> IF I COULD ASK, IT BRINGS UP
THE ISSUE YOUR GRANT GETS
SUBMITTED, STUDIO -- STUDY
SECTION REVIEWS IT AND
PRESUMABLY IT'S A SCORABLE
ELEMENT AND WHETHER THE PEOPLE
STUDIED THE SECTION ARE THE
RIGHT TO EVALUATE THE ASPECTS OF
IT.
WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS?
>> SO LET ME CLARIFY.
THE PDP DOES NOT ITSELF HAVE A
SCORE HOWEVER, THE INSTRUCTIONS
TO REVIEWERS FOR EACH OF THE
FIVE SCORABLE AREAS ARE ASKED TO
EVALUATE HOW DIVERSE RESPECTS RESPECTS
-- RESPECTIVES IN THE
ENVIRONMENT.
IT'S NOT ABOUT ITSELF A SEPARATE
SCORE CRITERION BUT BEING
INCORPORATED INTO THE OTHER
FIVE.
WE RELY ON TWO LEVELS OF REVIEW.
THE FIRST LEVEL A PEER REVIEW
AND SECOND LEVEL A PROGRAM.
WE'RE HOLDING REVIEW
ORIENTATIONS TO MAKE SURE PEOPLE
ARE LOOKING AT THINGS
APPROPRIATELY.
>> I HAD A QUESTION ON A
SEPARATE ISSUE, WALTER, THANKS
FOR THE UPDATE.
IN REGARDS TO THE RECOVER
PROGRAM, I'M WONDERING LOOKING
AT LONG COVID, I'M WONDERING IF
THERE'S ANY COORDINATION OR
COLLABORATION SHARED DATA
ELEMENTS, DATA SHARING WITH THE
MECFS RESEARCH CENTERS OR IF
THERE'S PLAN FOR THAT.
I'M THINKING ABOUT THAT IN TERMS
OF MAXIMIZING BOTH THOSE
EFFORTS.
I WAS CURIOUS WHETHER THAT'S
BEEN TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION OR
IF THERE'S COLLABORATION THERE.
>> SO JUST TO MENTION THE
SYMPTOMS OF POST ACUTE LONG
COVID LOOK EXACTLY LIKE ANY CFS
SYMPTOMS SO THOSE PEOPLE HAVE
BEEN SICK FOR YEARS.
THE THOUGHT WAS IT WAS DUE TO A
VIRAL INFECTION BUT WE DON'T
KNOW WHAT THE VIRUS IS.
MAYBE INFECTIOUS MONOIS
DEFINITELY INVOLVED IN SOME OF
THEM.
THERE'S GOING TO BE OVERLAP IN
SCIENCE FROM POST COVID WORK
WILL HOPEFULLY THEN HELP
UNDERSTAND MECFS BECAUSE IT'S A
NATURAL EXPERIMENT WITH MILLIONS
OF PEOPLE GETTING COVID ALL AT
ONCE AND WE KNOW WHAT THE VIRUS
IS AND THE RECOVER HAS
STANDARDIZED EVERYTHING.
THE CONSORTIA IS NOT
STANDARDIZED.
STILL A PROBLEM.
>> THE RECOVER PROGRAM IS VERY
EXCITING AND WOULD BE OF GREAT
VALUE TO CROSS-CORRELATE THE
NINDS ACTIVITIES WITH THE
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE.
THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE IS
ALSO INTERESTED IN THIS TOPIC
AND HAS ONE SUBSTANTIAL
ADVANTAGE THEY HAVE BLOOD
SAMPLES ON EVERYONE BEFORE THEY
GOT COVID.
OVER.
>> THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION -- LET
ME TALKED TO THE VA.
DO THEY HAVE A POST ACUTE
PROGRAM.
>> IT'S NOT AS ORGANIZED AS
YOURS.
THERE'S VARIOUS AD HOC
POST-COVID PROGRAMS AT MULTIPLE
MILITARY TREATMENT FACILITIES.
IT'S NOT UNIFIED MORE
STANDARDIZED.
>> SEND ME SOME NAMES AND WE CAN
FOLLOW UP.
>> ROGER THAT.
>> THANK YOU.
>> AND MAYBE SAMIR FOR THE LAST
QUESTION.
>> THANK YOU FOR THE UPDATE.
I WANT KNOW WHAT THE PLAN IS
GOING FORWARD WHETHER IT'S WORK
WITH BRAIN I.C.s OR SPECIFIC
INSTITUTES HAVE AFUNDING -- A
FUNDING AWARD?
>> THE GROUP IS JUST GELLING
NOW.
WE HAVE A GROUP ON THE INSIDE
WORKING ON THIS AND YOU'LL HEAR
FROM LYNN JAKEMAN ABOUT AN
INITIATIVE TO FUND GROUPS ON
SCIENTISTS FOCUSSING ON A
PROBLEM.
I THINK THERE'S OTHER THINGS WE
SHOULD THINK ABOUT DOING WE'LL
PUT THE GROUP TOGETHER AND HAVE
AN RFI AND I THINK WE'LL GO WITH
WHAT THE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE AND
IT'S A PROJECT COMING FROM THE
BUDGET.
THE OTHER INSTITUTES, I THINK
THEY HAVE THEIR OWN SENSE OF
WHAT THEY NEED TO DO NOW.
WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY WHEN WE
COME UP WITH SPECIFIC THINGS TO
GO TO THEM AND SAY WOULD YOU
LIKE TO JOIN US BECAUSE AS YOU
HINTED AT, THE BASIC
NEUROSCIENCE IS GENERALLY
APPLICABLE TO MULTIPLE SCIENCES
AND WE WILL HAVE TO SEE WHICH
WAY IT GOES BUT THE BRAIN
INITIATIVE WAS A GREAT EYE-
EYE-OPENER FOR ME.
WE DID STRATEGIC PLANNING 10
YEARS AGO AND HAD A BASIC
SCIENCE GROUP AND THE
RECOMMENDATION WAS DON'T TELL US
WHAT TO DO JUST GIVE US THE
MONEY AND NOTHING YOU CAN DO
HELP US KIND OF THING.
NOT SURE THAT WAS THE WISEST
MOVE GIVEN WHAT HAPPENED IN
BRAIN.
>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS JUST
E-MAIL ME.
I APPRECIATE YOUR ADVICE ON ANY
OF THESE TOPICS.
THANK YOU.
>> NEXT RICHARD BENSON'S GOING
TO TALK ABOUT OUR NINDS
STRATEGIC PLANNING EFFORT AIMED
AT OVERCOMING HEALTH DISPARITIES
WHICH WALTER MENTIONED.
RICHARD IS THE DIRECTOR OF OUR
OFFICE OF GLOBAL HEALTH AND
HEALTH DISPARITIES AND JOINING
HIM WILL BE I WON'T SAY RECENTLY
DEPARTED BUT FORMER AND MISSED
COUNCIL MEMBER KAREN JOHNSTON
AND I BELIEVE THEY SERVED AS THE
CO-CHAIRS OF THE HEALTH EQUITY
STEERING COMMITTEE.
OVER TO YOU.
>> THANK YOU, BOB.
CAN WE HAVE THE SLIDES?
HELLO.
TODAY WE PRESENT AN OVERVIEW AND
CONSOLIDATED RESULTS OF OUR
HEALTH EQUITY STRATEGIC PLANNING
PROCESS.
I'M GOING SAID THE STAGE BY
BRIEFLY DOWNLINING THE DETAILED
PLANNING AND PROCESSES THAT
OCCUR.
DR. KAREN JOHNSTON WILL GO
THROUGH THE ANALYSES AND
DR. TREVATHAN.
FIRKS I WOULD LIKE TO RECOGNIZE
THE HARD WORK OF MY NINDS
COLLEAGUES.
THOSE FROM MY OFFICE, THE OFFICE
GLOBAL HEALTH AND HEALTH
DISPARITIES, OUR HEALTH EQUITY
COORDINATING COMMITTEE AND THE
HEALTH EQUITY WORK GROUP.
ALL LISTED ON THE SLIDES AND
NONE OF THIS COULD HAVE OCCURRED
WITHOUT THE HARD WORK OF THE
DEDICATED NINDS STAFF.
THE HEALTH EQUITY STRATEGIC
PLANNING PROCESS WAS A
COLLABORATION BETWEEN THE NINDS
OFFICE OF GLOBAL HEALTH AND
HEALTH DISPARITIES AND THE
OFFICE OF SCIENCE, POLICY AND
PLANNING, OSDP.
THE GOAL OF THIS COMPREHENSIVE
PROCESS WAS TO DEVELOP A PLAN TO
GUIDE RESEARCH INVESTMENTS OVER
THE NEXT FIVE TO 10 YEARS.
THE COMPONENTS ARE INPUTS WE HAD
NOR PLANNING PROCESS STARTED
WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF A WORK
GROUP OF OUR NATIONAL ADVISORY
COUNCIL AND HIS WAS LED BY
DOCTORS JONSTON AND TREVATHAN
AND DR. BRODY AND DR. SETH.
WE HAD THE STEERING COMMITTEE OF
THE NATIONAL ADVISORY COUNCIL
AND ORGANIZED A HEALTH EQUITY
COORDINATING COMMITTEE FOR
IMPLEMENTING THE PLANS AND
WORKING ON THE DETAILS OF THE
WORKSHOP.
WE HAD A HEALTH EQUITY WORK
GROUP THAT INCLUDED MULTIPLE
PEOPLE ACROSS NINDS WITH
INTEREST IN THE PARTICULAR TOPIC
AND ASSISTED IN THE PORTFOLIO
ANALYSIS WE DID OUR PORTFOLIO
ANALYSIS AND HAD A REQUEST FOR
INFORMATION PUBLISHED AND I'LL
GO INTO THIS IN DETAIL AND PUT
TOGETHER A WORK GROUP WITH NIH
I.C.s AS WELL AS OFFICES.
WE HAD A SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE
REVIEW AND THEN LASTLY THE CAP
STONE WAS THE HEADWAY WORKSHOP
THE OUTPUTS WERE FINDINGSAGE --
FINDINGS AND KEY APPROVALS AND
THE INFORMATION WILL BE
DISSEMINATED TO RESEARCHERS AND
THE PUBLIC.
THIS WAS A CONFERENCE THAT
ATTACK PLACE BETWEEN SEPTEMBER
22 TO SEPTEMBER 24.
IT CAN BE FOUND ON THE NIH
VIDEOCAST.
WE HAD EXCELLENT SPEAKERS FROM
ACROSS THE COUNTRY THAT SPOKE
THE FIRST TWO DAYS.
THE THIRD DAY WE ACTUALLY HAD
BREAKOUT SESSIONS BUT WE GOT
MORE FEEDBACK FROM THE
COMMUNITY.
WE DID NOT RECORD THE THIRD DAY
BECAUSE WE WANTED TO HAVE OPEN
DISCUSSIONS WITH THE COMMUNITY
HOWEVER, THE FIRST TWO DAYS ARE
RECORDED AND ARE ON VIDEOCAST.
IF YOU HAVE TIME GO BACK AND
LOOK AT THAT.
ALL THE INFORMATION FROM THE
WORKSHOP WAS ALSO INCORPORATED
IN THE RECOMMENDATIONS YOU'LL
SEE TODAY.
WE STARTED BY ORIENTING OUR
STEERING COMMITTEE MEMBERS THESE
WERE POINTS WE TOLD THEM DURING
THE ORIENTATION WE WANTED TO
ADVISE ON THE PROCESS AND MAKE
RECOMMENDATIONS TO US ON THE
PROCESS AND DEVELOP
COMPREHENSIVE RECOMMENDATIONS
AND FOCUSES ON AREAS WHERE NIH
AND NINDS CAN HAVE IMPACT AND
ASKED THEM TO PARTICIPATE IN THE
HEADWAY WORKSHOP AND PRESENT A
DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR
FURTHER INPUT AT THE TIME.
SOME COMMITTEE MEMBERS LED SOME
OF THE BREAKOUT DISCUSSIONS AND
WE RECEIVED INPUT AT THAT TIME
AND THAT WAS INCORPORATED IN THE
RECOMMENDATIONS.
WE ASKED TO HOW TO STRENGTHEN
THE SCIENCE, IDENTIFICATION OF
STRATEGY OR INTERVENTIONS TO
ADDRESS BIOLOGIC AND SOCIAL
DETERMINATES OF HEALTH AND OTHER
PARTNERSHIPS.
WE BROKE THE STEERING COMMITTEE
UP TO SUB GROUPS AND HAD EXPERTS
FROM ACROSS THE COUNTRY IN
HEALTH EQUITY AND OTHER AREAS
THAT CAN INFORM THIS PROCESS.
THE FIRST COMMITTEE WAS TASKED
WITH DETERMINING STRATEGIES,
TARGETS, INTERVENTIONS AND TYPES
OF COLLABORATIONS THAT ARE
NEEDED TO OPTIMIZE INTERVENTION
CAN BE IMPLEMENTED AND SCALED
UP.
SUBCOMMITTEE B DISCUSSED THE
IMPACT OF SOCIAL DETERMINATES OF
HEALTH AND HOW IT IMPACTED
NEUROLOGICAL DISEASE ACROSS THE
LIFE SPAN.
AND HU IT CAN BE ADDRESSED IN
RESEARCH DIMENSIONS AND BE
SCALED UP.
SUBCOMMITTEE C DISCUSSED AND
DEVELOPED NINDS HEALTH EQUITY
RESEARCH FRAMEWORK.
WE'RE FINALIZING THE FLAME WORK
WE'LL USE FOR INVESTIGATORS TO
UNDERSTAND THE TYPES OF
INVESTIGATES AND GAPS AND
SUBCOMMITTEE D WAS RESPONSIBLE
FOR CALCULATING THE EXCESS DEATH
AND NEUROLOGICAL CONDITIONS
YOU'LL HEAR FROM DR. JOHNSTON.
SUB GROUP E WAS STRATEGIES FOR
SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION AND NINDS
PROGRAMS AND FUNDING
ANNOUNCEMENTS TO DIVERSE
COMMUNITIES INCLUDING
INVESTIGATORS MEDICAL PROVIDERS
AND SUBCOMMITTEE F1 WE BROKE
INTO TWO PIECES.
THEY WORKED TO DEVELOP AND
OUTLINE STRATEGIES AND BEST
PRACTICES FOR TRAINING AND
RETENTION OF A DIVERSE HEALTH
EQUITY RESEARCH WORKFORCE AND
SUBGROUP F2 DEVELOP AND OUTLINED
LOOKED AT HEALTH EQUITY TRAINING
AND THE DELIVERABLES WAS FOR
EACH COMMITTEE TO INCORPORATE
THEIR FINDINGS INTO
RECOMMENDATIONS AND WRITE
MANUSCRIPTS SO WE HAVE THEM FOR
EACH SUB GROUP AND OTHERS ARE
BEING WRITTEN FROM THE PORTFOLIO
ANALYSIS AS WELL AS FROM THE RFI
I'LL TALK ABOUT MORE AND ALL THE
INFORMATION WILL BE PUBLISHED IN
THE SUPPLEMENT TO THE JOURNAL OF
NEUROLOGY WHERE WE'VE WORKED
WITH NEUROLOGY AND BASED ON THE
INPUT FROM COUNCIL TODAY WE'LL
MOVE FORWARD WITH THE
PUBLICATIONS.
NOW I'LL BRIEFLY EXPLAIN THE
DATA FROM THE RFI.
THE RFI OR REQUEST FOR
INFORMATION IS THE WAY THE NIH
USE TO GET INFORMATION THERE
STAKEHOLDERS.
WE USE THE REGULAR MARKET NIH
USES TO PUBLICIZE THIS AND IT
WAS PUBLISHED FROM APRIL THROUGH
JULY OF 2020.
WE USED DIRECT SILLLATIONS TOO
NONPROFITS AND PROFESSIONAL --
DIRECT SOLICITATIONS TO
NONPROFITS AND ASKED TO ADVISE
OF NEUROLOGICAL DISEASE AND CARE
AND SOME QUESTIONS WERE SHORT
ANSWER QUESTIONS.
WE ALSO ASKED TO QUANTITATIVE
DEMOGRAPHIC QUESTIONS AND
RECEIVED 141 RESPONSES.
WE DID QUALITATIVE CODING OF
THIS INFORMATION AS WELL WHERE
WE TOOK SPECIFIC COMMENTS IN
TERMS OF INTERVENTIONS PEOPLE
MENTIONED USED TO ADDRESS SOME
HEALTH INEQUITIES AND GOT GREAT
INPUT AND THIS IS ALSO
INCORPORATED IN THE
RECOMMENDATIONS YOU'LL HEAR
TODAY.
WE RECEIVED INPUT FROM HEALTH
CARE PROVIDERS, RESEARCHERS,
PATIENT ADVOCACY GROUPS,
PATIENTS, CAREGIVERS AND A SMALL
PERCENTAGE OF GOVERNMENT
OFFICIALS AS WELL.
WE NOTICED MOST THE INFORMATION
CAME FROM URBAN AREAS.
WHEN WE DO THIS IN THE FUTURE
BECAUSE OF DISPARITIES IN RURAL
AREAS WE'LL TRY TO MARKET BETTER
IN RURAL AREAS BUT WE DID HAVE
OUR SMALLEST INPUT FROM RURAL
AREAS.
WE LISTED THE VARIOUS BREAKDOWNS
THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY OF
ORGANIZATIONS AND IT'S PRETTY
MUCH THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY IN
TERMS OF ORGANIZATIONAL
PRIORITY.
NOW WE'LL EXPLAIN OUR PORTFOLIO
ANALYSIS.
OVERALL GOAL WAS TO IDENTIFY
STRENGTHS, OPPORTUNITIES AND
GAPS IN THE NINDS PORTFOLIO.
THIS WILL BE USED TO FORM
ANNOUNCEMENTS AND COLLABORATIONS
GOING FORWARD.
WE WANTED TO DESCRIBE THE NINDS
HEALTH DISPARITIES OR HEALTH
EQUITY RESEARCH PORTFOLIO AND WE
USED THE HEALTHY PERSONS 2020 OR
2030 THE DEFINITION WAS NOT
CHANGE OF HEALTH DISPARITIES AN
EQUITY AND LOOKED AT THE MOST
QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE
PARAMETERS OF THE RESEARCH
PROJECTS AND USED THE NIH
RESEARCH CONDITIONS KNOWN AS THE
RCDC SYSTEM AND INCLUDED ALL
COMPETITIVE GRANTS.
THESE WERE ALL COMPETITIVE OR
COMPETING GRANTS AND SUPPLEMENT
RECEIVED NINDS DOLLARS AND WERE
ACTIVE SO THESE WERE ACTIVE FROM
JANUARY THROUGH DECEMBER OF 2016
THROUGH 2020.
THIS IS A FIVE-YEAR PERIOD.
THE PROJECTS WERE MATCHED TO THE
NIMHD DISPARITY FRAMEWORK AND WE
DEVELOPED A RELIABLE AND
PUBLISHABLE STANDARD OPERATIONS
PROCEDURE TO ENSURE TRANSPARENCY
AND REPRODUCIBILITY PROCESS AND
IT WAS USED TO INFORM THE
RECOMMENDATIONS YOU'LL SEE
PRESENTED TO OUR STEERING
COMMITTEE AS WELL.
WE USED THE QUERY OF THE DATA
SYSTEM AND CAME OUT WITH 9100
APPLICATIONS.
NEXT WE WENT IN AND SCREENED
MORE WE LOOKED FOR CERTAIN TERNZ
IN THE TITLE AND AC STRABLTH OF
AIMS AND WE LOOKED TO RECONCILE
THE DIFFERENCES.
NEXT WE DID ANOTHER LEVEL OF
SCREENING AT THAT TIME WHERE
MORE APPLICATION SCREENING TOOK
PLACE AND IF THERE WAS
DIFFICULTY AFTER REVIEWING THE
APPLICATION IN ADDITION TO ALL
THE OTHER SCREENING OF THE
SPECIFIC AIMS THE TITLE AND
ABSTRACT THAT WAS TO REVIEW AND
RECONCILE AS WELL.
LASTLY, WE ENDED UP WITH 58
APPLICATIONS AND WENT TO PROGRAM
DIRECTORS AND ASKED THEM
SPECIFICALLY THEIR OPINION IN
TERMS OF THIS BEING RELATED TO
SOME OF THE HEALTH EQUITY
GUIDELINE.
WE'RE PRETTY CERTAIN OF THE
VALIDITY OF THE RESULTS IN TERMS
OF THE 58 APPLICATION THE NINDS
FUNDED DURING THIS TIME PERIOD.
AND I'D LIKE TO KNOW THE FUNDING
NUMBERS ARE BASED ON THE
PORTFOLIO ANALYSIS AND WE USED
STRICT AND STRINGENT CRITERIA.
IF YOU LOOK AT OTHER SITES YOU
MAY SEE DIFFERENT NUMBERS BUT
THIS IS BIFFED ON THE
INFORMATION I TOLD YOU.
-- BASED ON THE INFORMATION I
TOLD YOU.
NOW OVER TO KAREN JOHNSTON AND
SHE'LL TALK ABOUT THE ANALYSIS
OF THE PROBLEM AND THE WORK OF
THE COMMITTEE.
>> SO I'M GOING TO SPEND THE
NEXT FEW MINUTES SHARING SOME
RESULTS OF THE ANALYSIS WE DID
PERFORM.
I'LL SHARE THE MORTALITY AND
PORTFOLIO ANALYSIS.
THE MORTALITY ANALYSIS WAS LED
BY MY COLLEAGUE STEVE WOLFE AT
VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH AND WHEN
WE STARTED, OUR GROUP FORMULATED
A QUESTION WE THOUGHT WOULD BE
IMPACTFUL AND THE QUESTION WAS
HOW MANY U.S. DEATHS FROM
NEUROLOGIC DISEASE WOULD HAVE
BEEN AVOIDED HAD NON-HISPANIC
BLACK AMERICANS EXPERIENCE THE
SAME MORTALITY RATES AS
NON-HISPANIC WHITE AMERICANS AND
FROM THE STATISTICS AT CDC AND
THAT WAS OUR WINDOW WE WERE
EXAMINING 2010-2019 AND WE HAD A
SUB GROUP THAT WENT THROUGH ALL
THOSE CONDITIONS AND THE ONES WE
FELT WERE PRIMARY NEURO LOGIC
LIKE HEMORRHAGE, PARKINSON'S
DISEASE, EPILEPSY AND M.S.
THINGS WE KNEW WERE PRIMARILY
NEUROLOGICAL DISEASE AND WHAT
IT'S BASED ON.
WE FELT A GROUP OF CONDITIONS
THAT WE FELT COULD CAUSE
MANIFESTATIONS AND COULD LEAD TO
NEUROLOGIC DISEASE AND THE
REFERENCE GROUP AND LOOKED AT
THE NON HISPANIC WHITE
POPULATIONS.
SO THIS IS A SUMMARY SLIDE FOR
THE MORTALITY OF NEUROLOGIC
DISEASE BY RACE AND ETHNICITY
AND THIS IS AGAIN DURING THE
DECADE PERIOD WE STUDIED.
WE CONSIDERED WE HAD THE YEAR
AND ON THE Y AXIS THE
AGE-ADJUSTED DEATH RATE PER
100,000 PERSONS AND YOU SEE THE
TOP LINE WITH THE HIGHEST
MORTALITY WAS THE NON-HISPANIC
BLACK POPULATION.
THE LINE UNDER IT, THE BLUE LINE
WITH THE NON-HISPANIC WHITE
POPULATION.
THE FIRST TWO CURVES WERE THE
PRIMARY ANALYSIS.
WHAT YOU SEE AS YOU LOOK AT
THOSE TWO CURVES IS FIRST IT
LOOKS LIKE IT'S RUNNING PARALLEL
AND ACTUALLY THE TWO LINES COME
CLOSER TOGETHER WITH THE
SMALLEST DIFFERENCE IN MORTALITY
FROM 2011 WE FOUND THAT THE
DIFFERENCE IN MORTALITY
INCREASING AFTER 2011 WITH THE
PEAK DIFFERENCE BEING IN 2019
WHICH IS OUR LAST DATA POINT.
THE DATA SUGGESTS NOT ONLY ARE
WE NOT STABLE IN THE DISPARITY
OF MORTALITY BETWEEN THE TWO
GROUPS AND IT'S NOT DECREASING
FOR SURE.
IT'S CONTINUING TO INCREASE.
AND WE GATHERED OTHER
POPULATIONS BY RACE AND
ETHNICITY AND THE PURPLE LINE
YOU SEE AND THE AQUA LINE IS
HISPANIC AND THE GREEN LINE ON
THE BOTTOM IS THE NON-HISPANIC
ASIAN HAWAIIAN POPULATION WITH
THE LOWEST MORTALITY.
IT'S A STRIKING DIFFERENCE FROM
THE HIGHEST AND LOWEST MORTALITY
GROUP AND THE DEFINITION OF
MORTALITY DISPARITY.
OUR GOAL WAS TO QUANTIFY THE
DEATHS AND THIS SHOWS THE DEATH
BY YEAR NON-HISPANIC BLACK
AMERICANS THAT'D SAME MORTALITY
RATE AS NON-HISPANIC WHITE
AMERICANS.
EVERY YEAR THERE'S ABOUT 2500
AVOIDABLE DEATHS AND OVER A
10-YEAR PERIOD IT'S 30,000
PERSONS AVOIDABLE DEATHS.
I'LL SWITCH GEARS AND TALK ABOUT
THE PORTFOLIO ANALYSIS.
WE STARTED WITH 1900 PROJECTS OR
PROGRAMS AND IDENTIFIED 58 HAD
SOME HEALTH EQUITY COMPONENT.
THIS GIVES A QUICK SNAPSHOT OF
THE NUMBER OF PROJECTS WHICH IS
REPRESENTED ON THE LEFT OF THE
SLIDE AND THE NINDS DOLLARS ON
THE RIGHT SIDE.
AND THERE'S A COUPLE THINGS TO
LOOK ON THE SLIDE.
FIRST, THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT
COLORS.
BLUE COLOR ARE PROGRAMS THAT
WERE FUNDED THAT WERE
UNSOLICITED AND THE PROGRAMS
THAT HAVE FUNDING ANNOUNCEMENTS
AND WERE SOLICITED.
SO A COUPLE THINGS WE NOTICED
OFF THE BAT.
FIRST THE DOLLARS SPENT WERE
MODEST ACROSS THE BOARD AND SEE
SOMETHING HAPPENED IN 2019.
THE NUMBER OF PROJECTS AND
DOLLARS SPENT SUDDENLY DOUBLED.
AND WHAT WE FOUND WHEN WE
DRILLED DOWN INTO 2019 IS THAT
IN 2019 THE NINDS PARTNERED WITH
THE NIHLBI TO PUT A FUNDING
ANNOUNCEMENT AND FUND A SERIES
OF UL1 PROGRAMS TO INCREASE THE
NUMBER AND FUNDING.
WE THINK IT'S A LOW HANGING
FRUIT WAY TO INCREASE THE
PORTFOLIO.
THE OTHER THING WE FOUND IS IN A
FIVE-YEAR PERIOD THE TOTAL
ALLOWANCE SPENT ON THE HEALTH
EQUITY PROGRAMS WAS $30.6
MILLION.
TO GIVE PERSPECTIVE THE OVERALL
FUNDING FOR ALL 1900 PROGRAMS
DURING THAT YEAR WAS $3.6
BILLION.
AGAIN A VERY MODEST PORTFOLIO OF
HEALTH EQUITY RESEARCH.
THEN WE LOOKED AT THE PHASE OF
RESEARCH AND YOU CAN SEE
CLINICCLINI
CLINICAL WAS THE MAJORITY
FUNDED.
WE LOOKED AT THE DISTRIBUTION OF
THE TYPE OF RESEARCH AND FOUND
OBSERVATIONAL STUDIES WERE MOST
FUNDED AND INTERVENTIONAL
STUDIES WERE A SMALL PROPORTION
FUNDED.
THIS IS ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY THAT
MAYBE IN TERNLZ OF -- IN TERMS
OF NEW INITIATIVES TO SUPPORT
AND WANTED TO LOOK AT DISEASE
AREAS FUNDED.
YOU CAN SEE STROKE AND HIV WERE
THE TWO MOST HIGHLY FUNDED
PROGRAMTERMS.
AND A WANT TO HIGHLIGHT A FEW OF
THEMES.
SO EXAMPLES OF RESEARCH GAPS
INCLUDED EPILEPSY, CEREBRAL
PALSY AND WE FOUND IN MORTALITY
ANALYSIS WHICH I DIDN'T SHOW
YOU, BUT WE FOUND THERE'S ALSO
AN INCREASE IN MORTALITY IN THE
MIDDLE AGE POPULATION.
STARTED TO THINK ABOUT WHETHER
DISEASE IS THE AFFECT OF
EPILEPSY AND CEREBRAL PALSY AND
STARTING TO LOOK AT DISPARITIES
IN POPULATIONS.
I'LL PASS IT OVER TO TALK ABOUT
THE RECOMMENDATIONS.
>> ALL THE SUBCOMMITTEE
RECOMMENDATIONS WERE COMPLIED IN
ASSEMBLED INTO A SINGLE EXCEL
FILE AFTER COMBINING AND
ELIMINATING REDUNDANCIES IN SOME
RECOMMENDATIONS.
THIS INFORMATION FOR THE COUNCIL
MEMBERS IS INCLUDED UNDER THE
HEALTH DISPARITIES
RECOMMENDATIONS.
I'M GOING JUST GO OVER BRIEFLY A
VIM OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS MORE
CONDENSED BUT STILL SUBSTANTIAL
AND SERVE TO ELABORATE IN THE
EXECUTIVE VIM FOR THE NEUROLOGY
DR. BENSON DESCRIBED.
AS YOU'RE SCREENING THROUGH THE
FIRST FIVE YOU'LL SEE A FEW
GENERAL THEMES.
ONE IS WE'RE MAKE
RECOMMENDATIONS THAT REQUIRE
NINDS TO NOT DO THINGS ALONE BUT
TO ENGAGE IN COLLABORATIVE
PARTNERSHIPS AND ANOTHER IS THE
NEED TO REACH OUT TO COMMUNITIES
THAT HAVE HIGH MINORITY AND
UNDER REPRESENTED POPULATIONS.
AND TO PUSH INTO AREAS OF
RESEARCH THAT REQUIRE
COLLABORATIONS ON THE PART OF
INVESTIGATORS.
WE SUGGEST THERE'S AN INCREASE
IN HEALTH EQUITY RESEARCH
FUNDING ACROSS ALL NEUROLOGICAL
DISEASES AND ESPECIALLY LOOKING
AT HOW SOCIAL DETERMINATES OF
HEALTH AND DISEASE AND BIAS CAN
DRIVE INEQUITY AND WHAT CAN WE
DO TO INCREASE MINORITY
PARTICIPATION IN ALL RESEARCH
AND NEUROLOGICAL SCIENCES BUT
ESPECIALLY IN CLINICAL TRIALS.
DEVELOP PRIORITY AREAS TO
ADDRESS SPECIFIC SOCIAL
DETERMINATED RELATED QUESTIONS
ACROSS THE LIFE SPAN AND LOOKING
AT MULTIDISCIPLINARY TARGETED
INVENTIONS AND TO WORK WITH
FAMILIES, COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDERS
AND OTHERS TO ADDRESS THESE
ISSUES.
WE ARE RECOMMENDED THERE'S A
MEASUREMENT AND INTERVENTIONS ON
SOCIAL DETERMINATES OF HEALTH
AND DISEASE RELATED TO DISORDER
AND DEVELOPING GUIDELINES FOR
RESEARCHERS AND TO LEVERAGE SOME
OF THE POWER OF EXPANDING AND
UTILIZING THE EXISTING COMMON
DATA ELEMENTS AND THERE'S
SEVERAL EXAMPLES BUT WE DO POINT
OUT THE PHOENIX TOOL KIT AS ONE
EXAMPLE OF THE TYPE OF TOOL KIT
THAT CAN BE USED.
PRIORITIZING THE EVALUATION OF
THE MOST IMPACTFUL INTERVENTIONS
DISCOVERED AND LOOK AT THE
IMPACT ON NEUROLOGICAL HEALTH.
WHEN ADDRESSING THE DRIVERS OF
ECONOMIC INSTABILITY, THAT'S
OBVIOUSLY AN AREA IN WHICH IT
REQUIRES PARTNERSHIPS BY
INVESTIGATORS AND NINDS AND
OTHER ENTITIES.
DEVELOPING AND VALIDATING SOCIAL
DETERMINATES OF HEALTH TO LOOK
AT ASSESSMENT OF NEUROLOGICAL
DISORDER IS CONSIDERED TO BE
ESSENTIAL.
EVERYTHING ON THE SLIDE IS PART
OF THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
EMPHASIS.
THIS CAME FROM THE GROUPS
INVOLVED.
FIRST, WAS TO INVOLVE THE
COMMUNITY EARLY.
THE RECOMMENDATIONS TO BEGIN
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT WITH
COMMUNITIES WITH HIGH
POPULATIONS OF MINORITY AND
UNDER REPRESENTED POPULATIONS AT
THE TIME OF DEVELOPMENT OF THE
RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND DESIGN OF
THE STUDY AND THIS NEEDS TO BE
EMPHASIZED IN FUNDING
OPPORTUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS AND A
COMPONENT OF REVIEWER
EVALUATIONS.
SEVERAL ARE REQUIRING COMMUNITY
ENGAGEMENT STRATEGIES AND WE
THINK NIH COULD REALLY PUSH THIS
AND REQUIRE REPORTING OF
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT STRATEGIES
IN PEER-REVIEWED PUBLICATIONS OF
NINDS FUNDED PROJECTS.
AND SPECIFYING THE IMPORTANCE IN
ENGAGING WITH UNDER REPRESENTED
COMMUNITIES IN THE FOA REVIEW
APPLICATIONS IS KEY.
THE NINDS SHOULD TRY A RANGE OF
RESEARCH EFFORTS AND IDENTIFYING
AND IMPLEMENTING STRATEGIES TO
INCREASE COMMUNITY DISTRUST AND
WE ALL UNDERSTAND HOW IMPORTANT
THAT IS.
WE CAN GET THE SCIENCE RATE BUT
IF WE DON'T ADDRESS THE
COMMUNITY EN DPAJMENT
COMMUNICATION AND ADDRESS
DISTRUST AND FOSTER TRUST OUR
WORK IS OFTEN NOT HAVING THE
IMPACT THAT WE NEED.
AND NINDS NEEDS TO TARGET THE AT
RISK POPULATIONS TO UNDERSTAND
HOW THEY MAKE DECISIONS.
THIS OF COURSE IS CONNECTED TO
THIS ISSUE OF COMMUNITY DISTRUST
AND MORE FOCUSSED ON HOW
COMMUNITIES AND INDIVIDUALS IN
THESE COMMUNITIES MAKE IMPORTANT
HEALTH DECISIONS THAT IMPACT THE
OUTCOME FROM NEUROLOGICAL
DISORDER AND PERHAPS IMPACT
PEOPLE'S RISK OF DEVELOPING
NEURO LOGICAL DISORDER.
BOTH BUILD AND DISSEMINATE
CURRICULUM THAT ADDRESS
CHALLENGES IN COMMUNITY-BASED
PARTS PA RESEARCH.
WE THINK THIS WILL BE REALLY
EFFECTIVE FOR INVESTIGATORS AND
THERE'S PROBABLY NONE OF US THAT
COULDN'T LEARN FROM EACH OTHER
AND BEST PRACTICES AND
PARTNERING WITH COMMUNITY
ORGANIZATIONS AS PART OF THE
HEALTH INEQUITY RESEARCH
TRAINING FOR ALL NINDS
APPLICANTS AND RESEARCHERS.
AND SUPPORT NETWORK OF
PARTNERSHIPS INCLUDING
PARTNERSHIPS BETWEEN
INSTITUTIONS AN HISTORICALLY
MINORITY COLLEGE AND
UNIVERSITIES.
THIS HAS ALREADY HAPPENED TO
SOME DEGREE AND SOME
PARTNERSHIPS HAVE BEEN EXTREMELY
SUCCESSFUL AND SO WE THINK
BUILDING UPON THAT WOULD BE
IMPORTANT WE THINK THE GROUP
FELT CONTINUING TO SUPPORT THE
CAREER DEVELOPMENT FOR MINORITY
JUNIOR INVESTIGATORS THROUGH
MECHANISMS IS CRITICALLY
IMPORTANT.
WALTER HIGHLIGHTED SOME OF THESE
MECHANISMS IN HIS ADDRESS WE
ENCOURAGE CONTINUED SUPPORT AND
AN AREA OF CHALLENGE IS THE LOW
SALARY CAP AND THE K AWARDS
WHICH CAN BE IMPORTANT FOR SOME
OF THE MINORITY JUNIOR
INVESTIGATORS AND NEED MORE TIME
AND PROTECTED RESEARCH,
EXPERIENCE AND MENTORING BEFORE
THEY CAN SUCCESSFULLY SUBMIT R
TYPE APPLICATIONS.
REQUIRE CERTIFICATE OF
COMPLETION FOLLOWING TRAINING
ACTIVITIES TO ENSURE THERE'S A
COMMON UNDERSTANDING OF HEALTH
DISPARITIES AMONG INVESTIGATORS.
CREATE NEW IDEAS FUNDING
MECHANISM TO PROMOTE HEALTH
EQUITY RESEARCH AIMED AT NOT
ONLY URM INVESTIGATORS BUT ALSO
ALL SCIENTISTS AND
INVESTIGATORS.
PROVIDE FUNDING AND LOGISTICAL
SUPPORT FOR WORKSHOPS AND
TRAINEES FROM UNDER REPRESENTED
BACKGROUNDS.
THESE TYPES OF ACTIVITIES HAVE
BEEN QUITE SUCCESSFUL WHEN
APPLIED ON THE SMALLER SCALE WE
THINK NINDS CAN DO A GREAT JOB
IF THIS IS EXPANDED.
EMPHASIZE INTERVENTIONAL
RESEARCH FOCUSSED ON HEALTH
INEQUITIES RESEARCH AND
INCREASING THE QUALITY OF THE
SCIENCE WE THINK THE
INTERVENTIONAL RESEARCH
COMPONENTS ARE GOING TO BE
CRITICAL.
FINALLY TO TIES THE SOCIAL
DETERMINATES OF HEALTH AN
DISEASE AND FORMED NATIONAL HD
AND NEUROLOGICAL DISEASE
SURVEILLANCE AND CENTRALIZED
NEURO LOGICAL DISORDER HEALTH
EQUITIES DATABASE.
THIS IS ANOTHER EXAMPLE WHERE
PARTNERING PERHAPS WITH OTHER
AGENCIES WILL BE IMPORTANT.
CDC OFTEN TAKES THE LEAD IN
NEUROLOGICAL DISORDER DISEASE
SURVEILLANCE IN ORDER TO DEVELOP
DATA.
THE GROUP FELT LIKE IT WOULD BE
HELPFUL AND PERHAPS ESSENTIAL TO
MOVE FORWARD.
FINALLY, TO THANK EVERYBODY
INVOLVED.
YOU SEE THOSE MENTIONED BEFORE
MENTION THE NUMBERS OF THE
ADVISORY COUNCIL AND MANY OTHERS
THAT PRODUCED THE MANUSCRIPTS TO
BE IN THE NEUROLOGY SUPPLEMENT.
TI
FINALLY, WE HAVE TIME FOR
DISCUSSION AND WE'RE TRIND
HEARING FROM THE GROUP AND WHAT
ARE PRIORITY ACTION ITEMS OR
LOW-HANG FRUIT FROM WHAT YOU
HEARD.
WHAT CAN WE START TO CHANGE TO
MAKE A DIFFERENCE?
IS THERE ANYTHING WE'RE MISSING
AND ANY OTHER THOUGHTS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH?
>> GIVEN THOSE CLEAR-CUT
QUESTIONS, I WAS GOING TO
SUGGEST TAKING DOWN THE SLIDE.
>> I LOVE THE FACT FINDING.
BASICALLY THE BACK OF THE
ENVELOPE CALCULATION ONLY $2,000
PER NEUROLOGICAL DEATH HAS BEEN
SPENT OVER THE PAST 10 YEARS.
HOW MUCH IS A LIFE WORTH?
I THINK IT'S A LOT MORE THAN
THAT.
I SUPPORT THE IDEA GOING FORWARD
OF INCREASING RESEARCH IN THE
AREA.
I THINK ONE OF THE LOW-HANGING
FRUIT AREA, I LOVE ALL THE
RECOMMENDATIONS YOU CAME UP
WITH.
IT'S BRILLIANT.
ONE AREA I'D LIKE TO EMPHASIZE
IS THE FACT THERE'S ALREADY A
LOT OF PEOPLE OUT THERE DOING
THIS BECAUSE THEY'VE HAD A HEART
FOR IT BUT IT'S BEEN UNDER
FUNDED AND HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO
GET IT FUNDED IN THE PAST 10
YEARS.
THERE MIGHT BE A WAY TO REACH
OUT TO THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN
PUBLISHING AND DOING RESEARCH IN
THIS AREA AND SAY HEY, WE'RE
READY NOW TO INVEST IN THIS
BECAUSE THEY ALREADY HAVE A LOT
OF TOOLS AND HAVE A POPULATION
OF PEOPLE STUDYING ALREADY IN
HAND AND THAT MIGHT BE A VERY
FAST WAY TO GET GREAT RESEARCH
STREAMLINED AND JUMP STARTED.
>> I APPRECIATE THE IMPORTANT
WORK.
THE CLEAR PRESENTATION AND
TARGETED EFFORTS AND THE FOCUS
ON THE ENGAGEMENT OF THE
POPULATIONS BEING INCLUDED IN
RESEARCH.
THERE'S A FOCUS ON EXPANDING THE
PORTFOLIO FOR HEALTH EQUITY
RESEARCH.
THERE'S OPPORTUNITIES TO LOOK AT
STUDY SECTIONS AND PROGRAM
OFFICERS BECAUSE I THINK AND
ADVANCING HEALTH EQUITY IS NOT
STRICTLY MEASURED BY THE DIVERSE
REPRESENTATION IN YOUR STUDY PAP
IT'S ONE ELEMENT.
AND HELPING PEOPLE UNDERSTAND
WHERE THE RISKS OF EXACERBATING
DISPARITIES IN THE RESEARCH
WE'RE DOING TODAY IN OUR
PORTFOLIOS FOR EXAMPLE, GENETIC
RESEARCH AND THE APPROACH STILL
DOESN'T HAVE STANDARDIZED
DEFINITIONS OF RACE AND
ETHNICITY ACROSS PRECISION
MEDICINE SO IT CONTINUES TO LEAD
TO INCONSISTENCIES AND THERE MAY
BE OPPORTUNITIES FOR HOW WE'RE
LOOKING AT THAT IN PARTICULAR.
THE SECOND AREA IS ELIGIBILITY
CRITERIA FOR STUDIES.
WE CAN ANALYZE THE STATISTICS OF
WHAT'S HAPPENING AND IT GETS A
MORE AND MORE HOMOGENOUS
POPULATION AND THEY'RE DESIGNED
FOR MAXIMUM STATISTICAL IMPACT
BUT NOT HEALTH EQUITY IMPACT.
WE NEED TO GET MORE FAMILIAR AND
BE MORE RIGOROUS HOW WE'RE
LOOKING AT THE
INCLUSION/EXCLUSION CRITERIA IN
STUDIES WHETHER THEY'RE TRIALS,
INTERVENTIONS OR OTHERS OR WHEN
THEY'RE MORE LIBERALIZED IT
OPENS UP OPPORTUNITIES TO ENGAGE
OTHER POPULATIONS AND FINALLY
THE WHOLE AREA OF DATA ANALYSIS
AND A.I. WE CONTINUE TO FRAME
AND SELECT ANALYTICAL PROBLEMS
INFLUENCED BY FACTORS OF THERE'S
A LOT OF RACISM BAKED INTO THE
SYSTEM.
I DO THINK THAT WHEN WE'RE
LOOKING AT THE DATA AND HOW WE
TRAIN AND LEARN AND TRIAL
DESIGNS, ETCETERA.
THAT WILL WILL BE INCREASINGLY
IMPORTANT TO DEVELOP SOME
EXPERTISE BY THE STUDY SECTIONS
IN THAT REALM AND SO WHEN YOU
THINK ABOUT GREAT WORK YOU'VE
ALREADY DONE WHICH IS HEAVILY
FOCUSSED ON THE COMMUNITY
ENGAGEMENT SIDE AND THE
POPULATION ENGAGEMENT, I'M JUST
CURIOUS YOUR THOUGHTS ON
EDUCATION AND EXECUTION ON THE
VERY WAYS THAT POTENTIALLY
FURTHER EXACERBATE HEALTH
DISPARITIES.
>> I WANTED TO ASK IF YOU WANTED
TO RESPOND.
>> FIRST, THANK YOU FOR YOUR
COMMENTS.
I THINK THEY'RE INCREDIBLY ON
TARGET.
I WILL SAY THAT I THINK I FEEL
IS THIS IS A TOTAL CULTURE
CHANGE.
THIS HAS TO BE AN INTENTIONAL
SET OF APPROACHES IN EVERYTHING
WE DO RELATED TO RESEARCH
BECAUSE YOU'RE RIGHT, IT'S BUILT
IN AND YOUR EXAMPLE IS THE
BIASES INTO RESEARCH.
I WANT TO COMMENT ON THE STUDY
SECTION ISSUE.
WE TALKED ABOUT WHAT WE SHOULD
BE DOING TO TRAIN STUDY SECTIONS
AND IS THERE AN OPPORTUNITY TO
INCLUDE COMMUNITY MEMBERS IN
THESE ENVIRONMENTS TO SHARE THE
DIVERSE PERSPECTIVE.
STARTING TO THINK OUTSIDE THE
BOX HOW WE DO IN THESE GROUPS IS
SOMETHING TO CONSIDER.
THAT'S MY TWO CENTS.
>> THANKS FOR THE CLEAR
PRESENTATION.
IN RESPECT TO LOW HANGING FRUIT
YOU MENTIONED AN INCREASE IN
DIVERSITY SUPPLEMENT AND
INCREASED IN K AWARD AMOUNTS FOR
UNDER REPRESENTED MINORITIES.
DO YOU ALL HAVE A RECOMMENDATION
AROUND HOW MUCH -- WHAT IS THE
AMOUNT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PER K
AWARD?
I WANT TO GET A SENSE OF THE
SCALE.
HOW MUCH MORE MONEY DOES THIS
COST.
I FEEL LIKE WE KEEP HEARING IT'S
ABOUT RESOURCES AND IT IS.
I'D LIKE AN IDEA OF SCALE.
IS THERE AN EARLY PRELIMINARY
NUMBER ARE WE TALKING 20,000
MORE, 50,000 MORE?
>> THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.
IF YOU HAVE A NEW NEUROLOGIST
WHO WANTS TO GAIN RESEARCH
EXPERIENCE WORKING WITH AN
ESTABLISHED INVESTIGATOR, THE
DIVERSITY SUPPLEMENT SALARY CAP
IS $75,000 AND THE OVERALL IS
$200,000.
THE TYPICAL STARTING SALARY FOR
A NEUROLOGY FACULTY IS ABOUT
$200,000.
THAT PLACES DOWNWARD PRESSURE
AND CONCERNED ABOUT THE INITIAL
STARTING SALARY OF THE NEW
FACULTY MEMBER OR HAVE LESS
PROTECTED TIME IN RESEARCH THEY
NEED TO BE SUCCESSFUL IN
SUBMITTING THEIR OWN K AWARD OR
R APPLICATIONS LATER.
THE DIFFERENCE IS PRETTY
SUBSTANTIAL INSTITUTIONS HAVE TO
COME UP IN.
I THINK CREATIVELY LOOKING AT
THIS TO THE RANGE AT NIH I SAW
IS BETWEEN $75,000 AND ABOUT
$100,000 THERE COULD BE BROADER
NIH-WIDE IMPLICATIONS I'M SURE
THE NIH FOLKS WOULD UNDERSTAND.
>> AND ONE COULD GET CREATIVE IN
TERMS OF SCALE AND WHAT A P.I.
COULD REQUEST DEPENDING ON THE
PARTICULAR SITUATION.
IF WE'RE SERIOUS ABOUT MOVING
FORWARD WITH LOW-HANG FRUIT I
IMAGINE WE CAN BE CREATIVE.
>> THE DIRECTOR OF PAIN POLICY,
WE CO-CHAIR SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE
INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAIN RESEARCH
COORDINATING COMMITTEE A FEW
YEARS.
AND WORK GROUP WAS ON DISPART OF
DISPARITIES AND PAIN MANAGEMENT
TO GENERATE NATIONAL PAIN
RESEARCH STRATEGY AND THE FIFTH
WORK GROUP WAS DISPARITIES.
MY QUESTION IS TO WHAT EXTENT
HAS THAT REPORT WHICH IS
PUBLISHED AND EASILY ACCESSIBLE,
ACTUALLY LED TO SPECIFIC FUNDING
DIRECTION EITHER THROUGH HEAL
VERSUS THROUGH AND IT WASN'T
JUST NIH, DOD, YOU NAME IT.
WIDESPREAD DIRECTION TO BRING
MORE MONEY IN THIS CASE TO A
NATIONAL PAIN RESEARCH STRATEGY
BUT THAT WAS SPECIFICALLY
DIRECTED AT DISPARITIES AND
LOOKING AT TO WHAT EXTENT IT
BECAME A DOCUMENT THAT DIRECTED
FUNDING CHOICES.
>> THERE'S WORK ON DISPARITIES
RELATED TO THAT AND NEW FUNDING
ANNOUNCEMENT AND ONE OUT NOW
RELATED SPECIFICALLY TO HEALTH
POPULATIONS THAT EXPERIENCE
HEALTH DISPARITIES IN PAIN.
SO THAT'S ONE OF THE
ANNOUNCEMENTS OUT THERE.
WE HAVE OTHER S THAT WILL COME
OUT AND WORKING TO IMPLEMENT
THAT AS WELL.
>> THANK YOU.
>> TRIPLE RESPONSE TO THE VALUE
OF THE DETAIL HERE.
PARTICULARLY AROUND
COLLABORATING AND WORK WITH
OTHER FUNDERS.
NONE WAS IN EPILEPSY.
OTHER SOCIETIES AND FOUNDATIONS
ARE STARTING DOWN THE PATH AND
ENCOURAGING GETTING THE
INFORMATION OUT THERE AND MAKING
SURE WE'RE ALL WORK IN A LINED
WAY AND LOOKING AT EQUITY IT'S
HELPFUL HAVE THIS KIND OF
INFORMATION AND THE RESOURCES
YOU PUT BEHIND IT AND I DON'T
KNOW HOW SOON AND ONES APPROVED
ARE WE ABLE TO START TO SHARE
THE INFORMATION, ZIT NEED TO
WAIT FOR FORMAL PUBLICATION AND
APPLAUD EFFORTS TO REALLY
COLLABORATE ACROSS THE ENTIRE
COMMUNITY TO LEVERAGE THIS.
>> IT'S PUBLIC NOW.
ANYTHING HEARD DOES HE IS
PUBLIC.
IT WOULD BE GREAT TO COLLABORATE
WITH YOU GUYS.
>> THE SOCIAL DETERMINATE FOR
HEALTH CARE IS AN AREA THAT CAN
BE WORKED ON ALMOST IMMEDIATELY.
RELATED TO DIVERSITY IN CLINICAL
TRIALS.
WE ALREADY HAVE SOME MANDATES IN
CLINICAL TRIALS.
IT WON'T BE HARD TO ENCOURAGE
THAT.
MANY OF THE I WOULD SAY GLOBAL
LEADING PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES
OVER THE LAST THREE TO FIVE
YEARS OR SO HAVE LAUNCHED
INITIATIVES AND PARTNERSHIPS
AIMED AT ADDRESSING THE IMPACT
OF SOCIAL DETERMINATES ON HEALTH
CARE.
A LOT OF IT IS RELATED TO RISING
COSTS OF HEALTH CARE ALSO VERY
RELEVANT FOR INCLUSION IN
CLINICAL TRIALS.
MANY WHITE PAPERS HAVE BEEN
WRITTEN ABOUT THIS AND AN AREA
THAT CAN IMMEDIATELY BEING
WORKED ON.
>> WE HAVE A FEW MORE MINUTES.
ANY OTHER QUESTION OR COMMENTS
OR RICHARD, ANYTHING YOU WANT TO
SAY?
>> GREAT DISCUSSION TODAY AND WE
LOOK FORWARD TO THE COUNCIL'S
FINAL VOTE.
I'LL HAND IT BACK TO JOHNSTON
AND TREVATHAN IF THEY HAVE FINAL
COMMENTS.
>> WE APPRECIATE EVERYONE'S
INPUT ON THIS AND I AGREE IT'S
AN OPPORTUNITY FOR SOCIAL
DETERMINATES OF HEALTH AND IT'S
ABOUT CHANGING THE CULTURE.
IT'S CHANGING THE WAY WE THINK
ABOUT THE RIGOROUS SCIENCE AND
IF WE CAN DO THAT IN THE NEXT
DECADE WE'LL HAVE REAL PROGRESS.
GINA.
>> I KNOW MICHELLE JONES IS
DOING FANTASTIC WORK AND WAS THE
TARGETED TERMS THAT COULD HELP
ALL OF THIS AND IN TERMS OF LOW
HANGING FRUIT, ASK MICHELLE WHAT
MORE WE CAN DO BECAUSE HER TERMS
HAVE BEEN WIDELY SUCCESSFUL AND
WE SHOULD INVEST MORE.
IS MICHELLE THERE.
>> WE SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASED
THE NUMBER OF DIVERSITY
SUPPLEMENT WE GIVE BUT THE
AMOUNT IS A DIFFERENT ISSUE.
MICHELLE RUNS A HUGE UNIVERSE OF
TERMS RELATED TO THIS.
I DON'T -- DO YOU WANT TO
COMMENT?
THERE'S A LOT YOU COULD SAY.
>> WE'RE THINK ABOUT WAYS TO GO
BETWEEN THIS INTERSECTION OF
HEALTH DISPARITYIES AND WE'RE
THINKING ABOUT ATTORNEY GENERAL
S WITH HEALTH DISPARITIES IS A
DIFFERENT ASPECT.
THIS WORK GROUP HAS PROVIDED US
WITH SOME REALLY GOOD IDEAS TO
LOOK AT THE SIMILARITIES AND
ALSO RECOGNIZE WHERE BECAUSE OF
THE RESEARCH AREA WE MAY HAVE TO
DO THINGS A BIT DIFFERENTLY AND
TO BRING IN OUR COLLEAGUE
DR. STEVE CORN WHO OVERSEE THE
TRAINING OFFICE AND AS THE BULK
OF THE RESEARCHER MECHANISMS.
HE ALSO HAS BEEN ACTIVELY THINK
OF WAYS TO IMPROVE DIVERSITY IN
THAT REALM TOO.
IT'S GOING TO BE ACROSS THE
ENTIRE INSTITUTE AND THINKING
ABOUT NOT RE-INVENTING THE WHEEL
WHEN WE DON'T HAVE TO AND THINK
OUTSIDE THE BOX WITH HEALTH
DISPARITIES.
>> I WAS INVOLVED IN THE LAST
HEALTH DISPARITIES PLANNING
EFFORT AND THIS IS MORE SPECIFIC
AND USEFUL.
>> DO YOU WANT TO SAY ANYTHING
WALTER OR SHOULD WE MOVE INTO A
BREAK?
>> THANKS FOR ALL THE WORK DONE
AND THIS IS A HARD PROBLEM AND
SAD WE HAVEN'T MADE MORE
PROGRESS WE NEED TO BUILD A
PROBLEM TO WORK THE PROBLEM OUT.
-- BUILD A NEW ARMY TO WORK THE
PROBLEM OUT.
>> CHRIS HAS A COMPREHENSIVE
COMMENT IN THE CHAT I ENCOURAGE
YOU ALL TO TAKE A LOOK AT.
WHY DON'T WE TAKE WE AREN'T TOO
FAR BEHIND SCHEDULE, WHY DON'T
WE TAKE A BREAK TO 3:15.
>> I FORGOT TO SHOW THE LAST
SLIDE IN MY TALK.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE THAT TO SHOW?
>> SORRY ABOUT THAT.
ONE AREA I WANTED TO LET PEOPLE
KNOW ABOUT.
BASICALLY WE'RE LOOKING HARD TO
SEE IF WE CAN LEARN MORE ABOUT
THE ENVIRONMENTAL DRIVERS OF
NEUROLOGICAL DISORDER.
WE KNOW A LOT ABOUT THE GENETICS
AND WE REALIZE THE RISK FACTORS
ARE IN THE INTERACTION WITH THE
GENETICS AND THE ENVIRONMENT
SIDE SO WANTED TO SAY THERE'S
WE'RE HOPING TO LAUNCH AN OFFICE
FOR ENVIRONMENT AL RESEARCH THAT
WOULD BE COMBINED WITH OUR
TOXICOLOGY WORK AND BEING DONE
OFFICE -- AND IT'S LOOKING AT
TRYING TO GET INPUT ON THE BEST
BASE TO TRY AND MAKE A DENT IN
THE BIG BLACK HOLE OF IGNORANCE
IN TERMS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL
DRIVERS.
WE CAN SEND A LINK WHEN THE RFI
COMES OUT.
THANKS VERY MUCH.
>> THANKS, WALTER.
>> THERE'S A REPORT ON HEALTH
DISPARITIES.
VOTING DOESN'T MEAN YOU
NECESSARILY APPROVE EVERY THING
IN IT BUT ENDORSE THE MAJOR
MESSAGES OF THE REPORT AND CAN
POTENTIALLY INCORPORATE COUNCIL
COMMENTS AS AN ADDENDUM TO THE
REPORT.
UNLESS THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS
ABOUT THAT, I NEED A MOTION TO
APPROVE THE REPORT AND A --
THANKS.
WE ARE REQUIRED TO DO AN
INCLUSION REPORT ON WOMEN AND
MINORITIES ON RESEARCH.
WE HAVE 10 OR 15 MINUTES TO DO
THAT AND BACK OVER TO RICHARD.
>> THIS WILL BE SHORTER.
I'D LIKE TO PRESENT THE NINDS
2019 TO 2021 TRIENNIAL REPORT ON
THE INCLUSION OF WOMEN AND
MINORITIES AS PARTICIPANTS IN
CLINICAL RESEARCH.
THE NIH MANDATED BY THE PUBLIC
HEALTH SERVICE ACT TO INCLUDE
WOMEN AND MINORITIES IN ALL NIH
FUNDED CLINICAL RESEARCH IN A
MANNER APPROPRIATE TO THE
SCIENTIFIC QUESTION UNDER STUDY.
THE PRIMARY GOAL OF THIS LAW IS
TO ENSURE RESEARCH FINDINGS CAN
BE GENERALIZABLE TO THE ENTIRE
POPULATION.
ADDITIONALLY, THE STATUTE
REQUIRES CLINICAL TRIALS TO FIND
DIFFERENCES BY SEX, GENDER, RACE
AND/OR ETHNICITY.
YOU CAN FIND THE ACTUAL REPORT
IN YOUR MATERIALS.
WE HAVE ONE QUESTION FINALIZE AT
THE END OF THE PRESENTATION
WHICH IS THE INTERPRETATION OF
RESULTS AND ALL NIN FUNDED
STUDIES THAT MEET THE DEFINITION
OF CLINICAL RESEARCH MUST
INCLUDE PLANS FOR THE INCLUSION
OF WOMEN AND MINORITIES WITHIN
THE APPLICATION PROPOSAL.
SCIENTIFIC REVIEW GROUPS ASSESS
EACH PROPOSAL AS BEING
ACCEPTABLE OR UNACCEPTABLE WITH
REGARD TO INCLUSION OF
MINORITIES AND GENDERS AND
RESEARCH PROJECTS AND REPORT
INFORMATION ON SEX, GENDER,
RACE AND THIS IS THE INFORMATION
YOU'LL SEE IF THE PROPOSED
RESEARCH INCLUDES AN NIH DEFINED
PHASE 3 CLINICAL TRIAL, EVIDENCE
MUST BE REVIEWED TO SLOW WHETHER
OR NOT IMPORTANT SEX, GENDERS,
RACE OR ETHNICITY EFFECTS ARE
EXPECTED AND THE CLINICAL TRIAL
MEET THE DEFINITION OR MEET THE
DEFINITION OF BEING AN
APPLICABLE CLINICAL TRIAL MUST
REPORT THE RESULTS OF WHAT THEY
CALL A VALID ANALYSIS AND
SUGGESTS PATIENTS ARE RANDOMIZED
INTO GROUPS AND A VALID WAY OF
PUTTING PEOPLE IN THE PHASE 3
CLINICAL TRIALS AND TO THE
INFORMATION IS REPORTED AS WELL.
WHAT I'M ASKING PART OF OUR
REPORTING PROCESS IS FOR THE
COUNCIL TO CERTIFY THE NINDS IS
COMPLIANT WITH THIS NIH POLICY
OF INCLUSION.
AND THERE'S INCLUSION REPORTS
SUBMITTED IN 2019, 2020 AND 2021
AND SEE THE NUMBERS FOR EACH OF
THE YEARS.
WE LISTED THOSE WITHOUT
ENROLLMENT DURING THAT PERIOD
AND THOSE THAT DID HAVE
ENROLLMENT.
WE SEPARATED THIS OUT BY THOSE
THAT WERE IN THE U.S. AND THOSE
THAT WERE CLINICAL TRIALS
ENROLLING PATIENTS
NON-U.S. SITES AND THOSE THAT
HAD MALE AND FEMALE AS WELL I
HAVE DIAGRAMS FOR EASE OF
COMMUNICATION IN SUBSEQUENT
SLIDES BUT IN THE REPORTS YOU
HAVE IN YOUR BOOKLET I HAVE THE
RAW DATA THERE AS WELL.
AND ASIAN PACIFIC ISLANDERS AND
ALASKAN NATIVE AND INDIVIDUALS
WITH MORE THAN ONE RACE OR
UNKNOWN.
THERE WAS NO BIG DIFFERENCE.
WE LOOKED AT ALL CLINICAL TRIAL
AND ENROLLMENT BASED ON SEX AND
GENDER.
WHEN WE LOOK AT THE PHASE 3
CLINICAL TRIALS BY SEX AND
GENDER ACROSS THE YEARS AGAIN
THERE SEEMS TO BE STABLE
ENROLLMENT THROUGHOUT THE THREE
YEARS.
THERE MAY BE SLIGHT DIFFERENCES
IN CERTAIN YEARS.
WE GO AND LOOK AT THE TRIALS TO
SEE IF THERE WERE ANY MAJOR
DIFFERENCES IN TERMS OF TRIALS
AND WHAT WE DID FIND IN SOME OF
THE YEARS LIKE 2020 THERE WAS A
TRIAL IN PERU THAT ENROLLED
PATIENTS.
THAT WOULD IMPACT THE HISPANIC
POPULATION AND THERE WERE OTHER
PHASE 3 CLINICAL TRIALS WE
LOOKED AT AS WELL THAT AFFECTED
THIS POPULATION, 2020.
HERE'S INFORMATION BASED ON
ETHNICITY AND THE SLIGHT
INCREASE THERE BUT AGAIN NO
MAJOR CHANGES ACROSS THE THREE
YEARS.
THIS SHOWS THE PHASE 3 CLINICAL
TRIALS VERSUS OTHERS.
WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE PHASE 3
CLINICAL TRIALS THERE WAS A
DIFFERENCE.
THIS WAS TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT
THE PARTICULAR TRIALS AND AGAIN
THERE WAS A PARTICULAR TRIAL IN
2020 THAT HAD A VERY CLEAR
ENGAGEMENT WHERE THEY WENT OUT
AND ENROLLED A LARGE NUMBER OF
HISPANIC PATIENTS AND I THINK
THAT MADE THE DIFFERENCE IN 2020
IN THOSE NUMBERS.
HERE THIS IS NEW DATA THAT WE
HAVE FOR 2020 IN ADDITION FOR
INFORMATION BEING TRACKED NOW
BASED ON SEX AND GENDER AND RACE
AND ETHNICITY.
WE ALSO TRACKED INFORMATION ON
AGE AND SO WHAT YOU SEE HERE
WHICH IS INTERESTING WHEN WE
LOOK AT 2020, THIS BLUE PORTION
OF THE PIE DIAGRAM IT REPRESENTS
CHILDREN UNDER AND A PROPORTION
OF CHILDREN LESS THAN 18 WE
LOOKED AT LARGE CATEGORIES FOR
THE ADULT POPULATION WE LOOKED
FROM 18 TO 64 AND ABOVE 65 AND
SEE THAT REPRESENTS THE REST OF
THIS PARTICULAR DIAGRAM.
SO WE PRESENTED THIS INFORMATION
AND THE REPORT TO SAYING WE ARE
COMPLIANT IN TERMS OF COLLECTING
THIS INFORMATION.
HOWEVER, WE DO KNOW THAT WE HAVE
TO DO BETTER IN TERMS OF
CONCLUDING WOMEN AND MINORITIES
IN I LISTED STRATEGIES IN TERMS
OF PEER REVIEW AND TALKED ABOUT
SINCE A PREVIOUS CONVERSATION.
WE ARE WORKING WITH NINDS STAFF
IN TERM OF BETTER MONITORING AS
WELL AS GRANTS OVERSIGHT AS
WELL.
THROUGH THE DIVISION OF CLINICAL
RESEARCH AND I'D LIKE TO THANK
MY COLLEAGUES PARTICULARLY
KATHERINE AND EVERYONE IN MY
OFFICE FOR HELPING PUT TOGETHER
THIS GREAT REPORT THAT YOU HAVE
THERE IN YOUR PACKETED.
-- PACKET.
WE RECENTLY DID AN OUTREACH TO
NINDS EXTRAMURAL AND TALKED
ABOUT THE ISSUE OF INCLUSION AND
ENROLLMENT AND GET BETTER
OVERSIGHT OF THE TERMS.
WE ALSO WORK WITH SPECIFIC
INVESTIGATORS IT HAVING
DIFFICULTY WITH DIVERSITY
ENROLLMENT.
THERE WERE SOME OTHER STRATEGIES
WE TALKED ABOUT IN THE PREVIOUS
REPORT WE'LL IMPLEMENT IN TERMS
OF HAVING INVESTIGATORS ENGAGE
COMMUNITY PRESUBMISSION AS WELL.
I'D LIKE TO MENTION AS WELL
YOU'LL HEAR THIS AFTERNOON BUT
TWO OF THE NETWORK HAVE MINORITY
RECRUITMENT AND DIVERSITY
COMMITTEES.
THIS IS SOMETHING WE CONSIDERED
WORKING ON AND WE HAVE A WORK
GROUP WITHIN THE DIVISION OF
CLINICAL RESEARCH UNDER CLINT
WRIGHT WHERE WE'VE LOOKED AT
BEST PRACTICES AND INCLUSION AND
TECHNIQUES AS WELL.
THANK YOU AND THIS WE NEED A
VOTE TO APPROVE THIS REPORT.
>> ARE THE DATA COLLECTED FOR
THE PREVALENCE FOR A SPECIFIC
DISEASE OR NOT THAT DETAILED
YET?
>> WE CAN GO BACK AND TRY TO
SORT IT OUT THE WAY IT'S
PRESENTED NOW IT'S NOT COLLECTED
BY THE DISEASE PROCESSES BUT WE
CAN GO BACK AND PULL THAT
INFORMATION OUT WE CAN DO THAT
AND LOOK BY ENROLLING SAY A
STROKE STUDY OR M.S. AND THEN GO
TO THE INVESTIGATOR AND THAT'S
HOW I WAS ABLE TO PARS OUT SOME
OF THE INFORMATION FROM 2020.
I DIDN'T PRESENT THAT TODAY BUT
WE DID A DEEPER DIVE TO
UNDERSTAND THE DATA BETTER.
>> SOMETIMES TOO RELEVANT FOR
STROKE STUDIES IS SOME OF THE
TRIALS HAVE EXCLUSION CRITERIAS
FOR PEOPLE OVER THE AGE OF 80.
THERE'S NUANCES IN THE DATA IF
THE PATIENT WAS EVEN ELIGIBLE
AND WHAT THE DISEASE ASSOCIATED
PREVALENCE IS.
>> GREAT POINT.
I THINK THIS YEAR WE STARTED
TRACKING THE AGE AND THAT IS
SOMETHING THAT WE CAN GET AT
BECAUSE IT'S ARBITRARY IN TERMS
OF THE CUT OFF.
>> OKAY.
WE HAVE A LOT OF REPORTS AND A
LOT OF VOTING THAT WE NEED TO DO
TODAY SO IF THERE'S NO OTHER
QUESTIONS ABOUT THE INCLUSION
REPORT -- WE NEED A MOTION
COUNCIL HAS ACCEPTED THAT
REPORT.
THE MOTION IS IN THE CHAT.
THANKS A LOT AND RICHARD THANK
YOU FOR DOING THE HEAVY LIFTING
WITH THE COUNCIL MEMBERS.
OKAY.
SO SPEAKING OF NEURO NEXT IS A
REPORT ON THE IMPORTANT CLINICAL
TRIAL NETWORK.
CLINT WRIGHT I BELIEVE IS GOING
TO GIVE A BRIEF INTRO TO THE
SEGMENT.
>> I AM.
CAN YOU HEAR ME?
>> HEAR YOU AND SEE.
>> PERIODICALLY THE NINDS
REVIEWS AND ASKS FOR REVIEW OF
OUR CLINICAL TRIAL NETWORK UNDER
THE OFFICE OF SCIENCE POLICY AND
PLANNING AND BECAUSE THEY'RE
NEARING THE END OF THE
INFRASTRUCTURAL AWARDS, WE
THOUGHT WE'D HAVE THEM EVALUATE
TOGETHER AND WE ASKED FOR A
WORKING GROUP OF COUNCIL TO DO
THAT.
AND I WILL INTRODUCE YOU TO THE
TWO CO-CHAIRS OF THE WORKING
GROUP BUT BEFORE I DO THAT I
WOULD LIKE TO REALLY CALL OUT
MEMBERS OF THE OSPP AND
CHRISTINA FOR ALL THE HEAVY
LIFTING THEY DID TO PULL THIS
TOGETHER IN ADDITION TO MEMBERS
OF DCR AND OTHERS WHO HAD TO
GATHER DATA TO DO THIS.
THE TWO CO-CHAIRS.
THE FIRST IS DR. VICKREY.
PROFESSOR AND SYSTEM CHAIR OF
VIROLOGY AT THE ICAH SCHOOL OF
MEDICINE IN MOUNT SINAI IN NEW
YORK AND FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE
AMERICAN NEUROLOGICAL
ASSOCIATION.
DR. VICKREY'S FOCUS HAS BEEN ON
INNOVATIVE HEALTH CARE
DELIVERIES RANGING FROM TEAM
BASED AND COMMUNITY BASED
PARTNERED MODELS FOR CONTROLLING
STROKE RISK FACTORS TO CARING
FOR VETERANS WITH PARKINSON'S
DISEASE.
DR. RICHARD RUDICK IS A LEADER
IN PHARMA AND ACADEMIC MEDICINE
HOLDING ROLES IN CLINIC RESEARCH
AND NEUROSCIENCE AT THE
CLEVELAND CLINIC AND BIO GEN AND
HIS WORK IS AN EMPHASIS ON
INNOVATION AND COLLABORATION AND
EMPOWERING LEADERSHIP TO MAKE
CHANGE.
I'M NOT SURE WHO WILL TAKE THE
LEAD ON THE WORKING GROUP
PRESENCE BUT I'LL HAND THE BAT
ON.
AS YOU HEARD THIS IS TO CONDUCT
AN EVALUATION OF THE TWO
NETWORKS FOCUSSING ON THE EXTENT
TO WHICH THE PROGRAM GOALS AND
OUTCOMES AND IMPACTS, EXTENT OF
COLLABORATION BUT THE
PRESENTATION AND REPORT IS WHERE
THE OPPORTUNITIES TO IMPROVE THE
NETWORKS.
THE NETWORKS WERE JOINTLY
EVALUATED AND WE USED A COMMON
FRAMEWORK AND DID NOTE WHEN
THERE WERE UNIQUE ASPECTS.
RICK AND I WOULD LIKE TO
ACKNOWLEDGE THE TERRIFIC WORKING
GROUP.
[LISTING NAMES]
AND THIS INCLUDED INDIVIDUALS
FROM INDUSTRY AND PATIENT
ORGANIZATIONS AS WELL AS
ACADEMICS AND WE WOULD ECHO THAT
THERE WAS FANTASTIC SUPPORT FROM
THE NINDS STAFF IN THE OFFICE OF
SCIENCE PLANNING AND POLICY.
WE MET SIX TIMES OVER EIGHT
MONTHS.
WE HAD PRESENTATIONS FROM
PROGRAM STAFF AND REVIEWED A TON
OF DOCUMENTS WITH ALL KINDS OF
DATA AS YOU SEE HERE ON
OPERATIONS, ORGANIZATIONS,
FUNDING, TIME LINE METRICS FOR
PROPOSALS, RECRUITMENT, TRAINING
ACTIVITIES AND SO FORTH.
I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE THAT WE DID
REVIEW PRIOR RECOMMENDATIONS
FROM THE NETWORKS EXTERNAL
OVERSIGHT BOARDS THAT MET ABOUT
ANNUALLY.
WE ONLY REVIEWED THOSE AFTER THE
WORKING GROUP HAD ALREADY
DEVELOPED OUR RECOMMENDATIONS SO
WE SAW THOSE TOWARDS THE END OF
THE PROCESS.
THERE WAS ALSO VERY EXTENSIVE
SURVEY OF NETWORK LEADERSHIP
STAFF, FRONT LINE TRIAL AND SITE
INVESTIGATORS AND LITERALLY
HUNDREDS OF RESPONSES AND THEN
WE WANTED TO DO SOME DRILL DOWN
AND HAVE SOME MORE IN DEPTH
INFORMATION SO THERE WERE SIX
SMALL GROUP DISCUSSIONS WITH
NETWORK LEADERSHIP AND FRONT
LINE INVESTIGATORS THAT TRACY
CLEMENTS FACILITATED ACROSS THE
SIX GROUPS.
WE HAVE FOUR SLIDES THAT
SUMMARIZE THE CONTEXT AND KEY
ASPECT OF EACH NETWORK.
I'LL GO THROUGH THESE BRIEFLY.
ONE POINT TO MAKE BOTH ARE OPEN
NETWORK MEANING INVESTIGATORS
ACADEMICS FROM OUTSIDE THE SITE
AND INDUSTRY CAN APPLY TO RUN
STUDIES THROUGH THE NETWORK.
IT'S NOT LIMITED TO
INVESTIGATORS WITHIN THE
NETWORK.
AND WE PLAN FOR RENEWAL IN 2023
SUPPORTS PRIMARILY PHASE 2
TRIALS OF BIOMARKER VALIDATION
STUDIES.
THE INFRASTRUCTURE WAS FOR DATA
AND CLINICAL COORDINATING
CENTERS WITH 25 SITES AROUND THE
U.S.
THE RENEWAL IN 2018 ADDED A
FELLOWSHIP PROGRAM WITH A SMALL
STIPEND AND IN THE TABLE YOU CAN
SEE THAT OVER THE YEARS FROM
2011 TO 2020 ABOUT $180 MILLION
WAS SPENT IN TOTAL.
36% OF THAT WENT DIRECTLY TO
TRIAL COSTS.
BUT WE WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT
THAT WHILE WE'VE INCLUDE THE
TRIAL COSTS IN THE TABLE, THE
TRIALS THEMSELVES ARE FUNDED
SEPARATELY FROM THE
INFRASTRUCTURE.
AS THE BEEN ONGOING TRIALS AND
TWO ARE BIOMARKERS OF THE
INTERVENTION SMALL MOLECULE AND
A RANGE OF NEUROLOGIC CONDITIONS
BUT THERE'S FOUR IN
NEUROMUSCULAR DISEASE ALBEIT A
RANGE OF DIFFERENT NEURO
MUSCULAR DISEASES.
THE INFRASTRUCTURE WAS
ESTABLISHED IN 2013, RENEWED IN
2018 WITH THE GOAL PLANNED FOR
2023.
IN CONTRAST THAT WAS A BALANCED
PORTFOLIO OF CLINICAL TRIALS AND
BIOMARKER VALIDATION AND
TRAINING OF FUTURE STROKE
RESEARCHERS AND A MANAGEMENT
CENTER, 27 REGIONAL COORDINATING
CENTERS AND VERY IMPORTANTLY
SPOKES TO ALL THE CENTERS SO IT
INVOLVES ABOUT 500 HOSPITALS
ACROSS THE U.S.
THERE IS SOME SUPPORT FOR
TRAINING AND IN THE YEARS ABOUT
$258 MILLION HAS BEEN SPENT WITH
63% TOWARDS TRIALS.
A HIGHER PERCENTAGE IN NEURO NEX
FUND SEPARATELY FROM THE
INFRASTRUCTURE.
OF THE 14 COMPLETED AND ONGOING
STUDIES, THE FOUR UNDERWAY AT
THE TIME THAT STROKE NET WAS
INITIATED, THERE'S A GOOD
BALANCE OF ACUTE PREVENTION AND
RECOVERY TRIALS AS YOU CAN SEE
IN THE TABLE.
MOST HAVE BEEN PHASE 3.
A COUPLE PHASE 2 AND ONE
ANCILLARY STUDY.
SO THERE WAS CERTAINLY A CENSUS
OF THE WORKING GROUP THAT
CONTINUED SUPPORT WAS JUSTIFIED
FOR NEURO NEX AND THERE'S BEEN
HIGH IMPACT STUDIES AND THERE'S
BEEN A LOT OF IN PLACE TO BUILD
THE INFRASTRUCTURE FROM SCRATCH.
IN TERMS OF IMPACT, THE ONES
COMPLETED THERE WAS AN
OBSERVATIONAL STUDY TO THE
SUBSEQUENT TRIALS THAT LED TO
THE EVIDENCE FOR GENE-TARGETED
THERAPY AND A PHASE 2 TRIAL THAT
PROVIDED EVIDENCE FOR
PROGRESSIVE M.S. WITH GAPS IN
TREATMENTS AND THE DIFFUSE 3
TRIAL ANOTHER EXAMPLE FROM
STROKE NET THAT LED TO CHANGES
IN PRACTICE GUIDELINES.
IN TERMS OF EFFICIENCY, I WANT
TO HIGHLIGHT ONCE TRIALS ARE
ACTIVATED, THE NETWORKS WERE
TRACKING THEIR METRICS AND THERE
WERE CERTAINLY SOME IMPROVEMENTS
OVER TIME.
FOR EXAMPLE, THERE'S A RECENT
ANNOUNCEMENT TO ADD PLATFORM
TRIALS RELATED TO THROMB
INFORMATIONECTOMY AND
COLLABORATIONS TO THE COMMUNITY.
THROMBECTOMY AND SOME WERE
FUNDED FROM INVESTIGATORS FROM
OUTSIDE THE NETWORK.
THERE'S SUPPORT FOR CLINICAL
INVESTIGATORS AS WE DISCUSSED.
THERE WAS SOME INVOLVEMENT OF
PATIENT ADVOCACY GROUPS THOUGH
THAT WAS SOMEWHAT VARIABLE
ACROSS TRIALS AND THERE WERE
SOME INDUSTRY ENGAGEMENT.
FOR EXAMPLE, SEVERAL TRIALS WERE
CO-LED BY INDUSTRY SPONSORS AND
COMPANIES THAT PROVIDED
MEDICATIONS AND OTHER TYPES OF
SUPPORT TO SEVERAL TRIALS.
I'LL TURN IT OVER TO RICK.
>> I WANT TO ADD MY THANKS TO
NOT ONLY BARBARA AND CLINT AND
THE LEADERSHIP OF THE NETWORKS
AT NINDS ESPECIALLY KARA, SARA
AND CHRISTINA WITHOUT WHOM WE
WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO DO
THE PROJECT.
WE'RE VERY GRATEFUL FOR THAT.
I ALSO WANT TO ENDORSE THE
COMMENT THAT THE PROGRESS AND
ACCOMPLISHMENTS STARTING THESE
NETWORKS FROM SCRATCH HAS BEEN
PRETTY IMPRESSIVE.
WE DEFINITELY RECOMMEND BUILDING
FROM WHERE THEY ARE NOW.
WE CAME UP WITH SIX
RECOMMENDATIONS SLIGHTLY
DECEPTIVE BECAUSE THERE'S THREE
WITHIN THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
BUDGET BUT GENERALLY SIX
RECOMMENDATION EED --
RECOMMENDATIONS WELL GO THROUGH
NOW.
AND THESE TOP TWO ARE CRITICAL
TO THE FUTURE HEALTH AND
POSSIBLY EVEN VIABILITY OF THE
NETWORK AND WANT TO EMPHASIZE
THOSE TWO.
IN ADDITION AT THE END WE WANT
TO FRAME TWO ADDITIONAL
IMPORTANT STRATEGIC ISSUES THAT
MIGHT BE CONSIDERED BY NINDS
LEADERSHIP BEYOND THE SCOPE OF
THESE SIX RECOMMENDATIONS.
SOW FOR THE FIRST RECOMMENDATION
AND BY THE WAY THESE WERE RANK
ORDERED AND THE TOP TWO
RECOMMENDATIONS THERE WAS ALWAYS
A STRONG AGREEMENT THESE ARE THE
TOP TWO AND THIS WAS THE FIRST.
SO THE PANEL RECOGNIZE THE VALUE
OF IDEAS AND PROPOSALS THAT
BUBBLE UP FROM THE RESEARCH
COMMUNITY BUT FEEL THERE WOULD
BE MAJOR ADVANTAGES TO SOME
PROACTIVE PRIORITY SETTING.
THIS COULD SERVE AS A MECHANISM
TO ENGAGE THE COMMUNITY AND IN
ESTABLISHING WHAT THE AREAS OF
HIGH OPPORTUNITY ARE.
IT COULD GENERATE COLLABORATIONS
FROM THE RESEARCH COMMUNITY AND
REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF COMPETITION
BETWEEN INVESTIGATORS WHO MIGHT
COME IN WITH COLLABORATIVE
APPLICATIONS AND IT COULD BE
THEORETICALLY LEAD TO HIGHER
IMPACT PROPOSALS AND PROJECTS.
WE DID HEAR DURING THE
INTERVIEWS AND FROM SOME SURVEY
QUESTIONS THERE WASN'T TOO CLEAR
TO A LOT OF INVESTIGATORS WHAT
WAS A PRIORITY.
I WANT TO EMPHASIZE THIS MAY BE
THE CONCURRENT APPROACH BUT
HARDLY UNIQUE ACROSS THE AREA.
MANY INSTITUTES AND CENTERS
PRIORITIZE NEEDS USING COMMUNITY
ENGAGEMENT AS A WAY TO
COLLABORATIVELY FUND PRIORITIES
AND THEN ISSUE ANNOUNCEMENTS
REGARDING THOSE PRIORITIES TO
GUIDE THE APPLICATIONS.
AGAIN, WE'RE NOT GOING TO
PROPOSE ELIMINATING THE
INVESTIGATOR INITIATED BUBBLE UP
APPROACH BUT RATHER TO AUGMENT
THAT WITH THIS RECOMMENDATION.
WE DO RECOMMEND IMPLEMENTING THE
MULTISTAKEHOLDER STUDIES FOR
SCIENTIFIC PROMISE AND ISSUE
FUNDING OPPORTUNITY
ANNOUNCEMENTS FOR THE IDENTIFIED
PRIORITY TO GUIDE THE
INVESTIGATORS.
LEVERAGE THIS APPROACH TO
ADVANCE THE USE OF INNOVATIVE
STUDY DESIGNS AND METHODS LIKE
PLATFORM TRIALS OR VIRTUAL
TRIALS AND PROMISING EMERGING
TECHNOLOGIES THAT COULD HAVE A
BIG IMPACT.
BECAUSE OF THE IMPORTANCE OF
PEDIATRIC STUDIES, WE STRONGLY
RECOMMEND THERE BE A REQUIREMENT
FOR TWO PEDIATRIC TRIALS PER
NETWORK AND POTENTIALLY TO
INCLUDE LONG-TERM OUTCOME
STUDIES GIVEN THE UNIQUE ISSUES
WITH PEDIATRIC TRIALS.
THE SECOND TOP RECOMMENDATION IS
TO MONUMENTALLY IMPROVE THE
PRE
PREPRE
PRE-AWARD REVIEW AND THE TIMES
FROM CONCEPT PROPOSAL SUBMISSION
TO STUDY ACTIVATION ARE ABOUT
THREE YEARS ON AVERAGE IN
NEURONEX AND TWO YEARS ON
AVERAGE FOR STROKE NET.
THAT UNDER STATES WHAT THE
PROBLEM IS BECAUSE THE SUCCESS
RATES OF PROPOSALS SUBMITTED ARE
PRETTY LOW, 5.5% FOR NEURONEXT
AND THE TIME LINES AND LOW
SUCCESS RATES AND WE FOUND THAT
NETWORK STAFF AND APPLICATIONS
SPENT A LOT OF TIME CONDUCTING
INTERNAL NETWORK REVIEWS AND
DOING METICULOUS AND OUTSTANDING
PLANNING FOR MANY PROPOSALS THAT
WERE NEVER INITIATED CONSUMING
SCARCE RESOURCES AND LOWERING
INVESTIGATOR ENTHUSIASM FOR THE
NETWORKS.
THIS CAME THROUGH CONSISTENTLY
IN ALL THE APPROACHES THAT WE
TOOK TO GET FEEDBACK.
SO WE ALSO SAW SOME DATA FROM
NEURONEXT THAT WERE A LITTLE BIT
WORRISOME AND MIGHT BE
CONSISTENT WITH LOWERED
ENTHUSIASM FOR THE NETWORKS.
EXCLUDING THE FIRST TWO YEARS OF
NEURONEXT IN THE FOUR YEAR
PERIOD FROM 2016 TO 2020, THERE
WERE 27 APPLICATIONS.
IN THE FOUR YEARS PROCEEDING
THAT, SO WE'RE LOOKING AT FOUR
YEARS COMPARED TO FOUR THERE
WERE 87.
SO IGNORING THE START UP TWO
YEARS, IT WENT FROM 87 PROPOSALS
DOWN TO 27.
NOW, THERE MAY BE REASONS FOR
THAT BEYOND LOWERED ENTHUSIASM
BUT WE WERE CONCERNED GIVEN THE
OTHER FEEDBACK ON THE POINT AND
THE RECOMMENDATION IS WE
RECOMMEND THE TIME BETWEEN
CONCEPT SUBMISSION TO NOGA BE
REDUCED BY AT LEAST 50%.
THAT'S A VERY AMBITIOUS
RECOMMENDATION BUT WE THINK THAT
WOULD REALLY BE IMPORTANT FOR
THE HEALTH AND VIABILITY OF THE
NETWORKS OVER TIME.
AND AS PART OF THAT WE THINK IT
MAY BE ADVISABLE TO MOVE THE
PEER REVIEW EARLIER IN THE
PROCESS.
SO PROPOSALS NOT GOING TO DO
WELL DON'T CONSUME OUR RESOURCES
IN METICULOUS PLANNING.
WE HEARD FROM MORE THAN ONE
INVESTIGATOR OR NETWORK
PARTICIPANT THAT IT'S EXTREMELY
DEMORALIZING TO SPEND TWO TO
THREE YEARS ONLY TO FIND OUT IT
WASN'T CONSIDERED HIGH ENOUGH
PRIORITY TO ACHIEVE A FUNDABLE
SCORE IN THE STUDY SECTION.
ONE IDEA THAT WE HAD, WHICH
COULD BE CONSIDERED WOULD BE TO
NOT ONLY MOVE THE PEER REVIEW
BUT INCLUDE THE FUNDING FOR
TRIALS WITHIN THE NETWORK
THEMSELVES SO THE NETWORKS WOULD
HAVE CONTROL OVER THE
PEER-REVIEW PROCESS AND THE
FUNDING OF PROPOSALS THAT THEY
HAVE WORK ON.
THIS COMBINED WITH THE FIRST
PROACIVELY -- PROACTIVELY
DEFINING PRIORITIES WE BELIEVE
WOULD BE THE TOP TWO
RECOMMENDATIONS.
>> WE HAVE INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL
COMMUNITI
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND STARTED
WITH ADVOCACY GROUP ENGAGEMENT.
WE HEARD IT WAS IMPORTANT AND
EVIDENCE OF IT BUT IT SEEMED
PRETTY INCONSISTENT AND I THINK
ONE OF THE THEMES HERE IS THE
NOTION OF INTENTIONALITY AND
WITH THE NEXT FUNDING CYCLE
THERE'S OPPORTUNITY FOR
INTENTIONALITY ABOUT ENROLLMENT
AND PLACEMENT OF PATIENT
ADVOCACY GROUPS IT ALSO SEEMED
LIKE WHERE THERE WAS INVOLVEMENT
IT WAS FOCUSSED ON RECRUITMENT
AN RETENTION WITH A BROADER
STAGES OF PROTOCOL DEVELOPMENT
AND REPORTING AND SO FORTH.
AND THERE WEREN'T REALLY THAT WE
COULD IDENTIFY EXPLICIT AND
CONSISTENT EXPECTATIONS ON WHAT
THE PACK WOULD DO AND WHERE
SHOULD BE PLACED.
SO THE WORKING GROUP'S
RECOMMENDATION WAS TO ELEVATE
THE ROLE TO MAKE IT
INTENTIONALLY AN INTRINSIC
PRINCIPLE IN ALL STAGES OF
RESEARCH NOT JUST RECRUITMENT
AND RETENTION BUT EVERYTHING
FROM PROJECT DEVELOPMENT TO
DISSEMINATION AND EVERYTHING IN
BETWEEN.
ONE WAY WOULD BE TO INCLUDE
REPRESENTATION OF LEADERSHIP OF
THE NETWORKS AND TRIALS AND
SITES AND THOUGHT THE PACK
SHOULD BE AT THE GOVERNANCE
STRUCTURE REFLECTING MAXIMAL
IMPACT.
YOU'LL HEAR A THEME AS YOU HEARD
BEFORE, THERE HAS TO BE RESOURCE
TO DO THIS.
THESE AREN'T ENTITIES THAT COULD
BE SET UP WITHOUT HAVING THE
RESOURCES TO DO SO.
IN THE AREA OF THE INDUSTRY, IT
APPEARED THAT INDUSTRY
INVOLVEMENT HAVE BEEN LIMITED
AND MAY EVEN BE DECLINING
POSSIBLY BECAUSE OF THE LONG
TIME LINES AND THE NEED FOR
SEPARATE PEER REVIEW AND YET
THERE WAS CERTAINLY A SENSE THAT
THERE WERE A LOT OF POTENTIAL
BENEFITS.
SO THE WORKING GROUP RECOMMENDS
CONSULTING BOARDS FOR EACH
NETWORK AND TO THINK CREATIVELY
ABOUT WAYS THAT COULD BE MUTUAL
BENEFIT.
FOR EXAMPLE, ADVISORY ON STUDY
DESIGN AND REGULATORY ISSUES.
PERHAPS INFORMATION ON PROMISING
COMPOUNDS AND CERTAINLY
INVOLVEMENT IN TRAINING IS OF
FUTURE INVESTIGATORS.
THERE MAY BE MORE OPPORTUNITIES
FOR PARTNERSHIPS TO BRING IN
PRODUCT AND SO FORTH.
AS WELL AS CHANGES WITH
RECOMMENDATIONS 1 AND 2
ENCOURAGE COMPANIES TO BE
INVOLVED IN THE NETWORKS FOR
THEIR TRIALS.
AND FOR THE THIRD PART OF THE
RECOMMENDATION, THIS HAS TO DO
WITH THE INTERNAL COMMUNITY AND
THERE SEEMED TO BE A SCARCITY OR
AT LEAST WE WERE HEARING FROM
SITES CHALLENGES IN TERMS OF
ADEQUATE RESOURCES FOR COMMUNITY
OUTREACH FOR SUBJECT
IDENTIFICATION AND RECRUITMENT.
WE HEARD SOME INVESTIGATORS WERE
MAKE CHOICE IN RECRUITING FOR A
BETTER PAYING TRIAL FROM
INDUSTRY VERSUS ONE FROM THE
NETWORK.
THERE WAS ALSO A NUMBER OF
COMMENTS ABOUT TURNOVER OR HOW
TO MAKE COORDINATOR RETENTION
STRONGER AND A LOT OF GOOD IDEAS
ABOUT HOW TO DO THIS.
SO WE RECOMMENDED INCREASING
ATTENTION TO AND INCREASING
RECRUITMENT FROM UNDER
REPRESENTED GROUPS WHICH COULD
BE GROUPS WITH RARE CONDITIONS
AND BETTER RESOURCING AND
RECOGNIZING THE ROLE OF
COORDINATORS.
WE HAVE A FIFTH RECOMMENDATION
WAS TO SET EXPLICIT GOALS TO
ADDRESS DIVERSITY, EQUITY AND
INCLUSION AND THEN RESOURCE
THOSE.
AND WE RECOGNIZE THE NETWORKS
HAD MADE EFFORTS TO TRY TO
RECRUIT STUDY PARTICIPANTS FROM
RACES AND ETHNICITIES.
WE LOOKED AT THE DATA OF ALL
NEURONEXT PARTICIPANTS AND
STROKENET PARTICIPANTS SINCE
INCEPTION.
WE COMPARED THIS TO 2020
U.S. CENSUS DATA IN THE AREA OF
HISPANIC AND LATINO TRIAL
PARTICIPANTS WE WERE FAR UNDER
IN THE NETWORKS THEN THE CENSUS
DATA.
AND WITH THE EXCEPTION OF BLACK
PARTICIPANTS IN STROKENET, THERE
WAS ALSO UNDER REPRESENTATION OF
NON-WHITE RACES.
EVEN WITHIN THE BLACK
PARTICIPANTS OF STROKENET, THERE
WAS VARIABILITY.
SOME TRIALS IT WAS VERY LOW AND
SOME WERE UP TO 50%.
WE ALSO NOTED THE DIVERSITY OF
THE WORKFORCE AND TRAINEES WAS
NOT AS SKFTLY TRACKED SO IT --
EXACTLY TRACKED SO IT WAS HARDER
TO TELL HOW THAT WAS DOING.
THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO SET AN
EXPLICIT GOAL TO ACHIEVE A
DISTRIBUTION OF STUDY
PARTICIPANTS AND TRAINEES AND
STAFF THAT AT LEAST REFLECT THE
PROPORTIONS OF INDIVIDUALS BY
RACE AND HISPANIC ETHNICITY
ACCORDING TO THE 2020 CENSUS.
OBVIOUSLY, THERE COULD BE
CONDITIONS OR STUDIES WHERE YOU
MAY WANT TO EXCEED THE
U.S. CENSUS WHICH IS WHY WE SAY
AT LEAST THAT PROPORTION.
AND WE RECOMMEND THERE BE A GOAL
TO ACHIEVE THIS END POINT AND
THAT THE DEI PLAN IS A TOOL NOT
AN END POINT.
AND THE FIFTH RECOMMENDATION ON
ENHANCING THE WORKFORCE
DEVELOPMENT, READINESS AND
RETENTION, IT WAS CLEAR TRAINING
IS AN IMPORTANT PART OF THE
NETWORK.
WE WANT THE NEXT GENERATION OF
CLINICAL TRIAL INVESTIGATORS, IT
SEEMED THERE WAS NOT ENOUGH
SUPPORT IN TRAINING AND IN
NEURONEXT AND EXPLICIT
INFORMATION ABOUT WHO IS THIS
TARGETING WHETHER THE TRAINING
REQUIREMENTS AND WHAT ARE WE
AIMING FOR WITH THE RESOURCES.
SO WE WOULD RECOMMEND FOR THE
NEXT CYCLE TO ESTABLISH SPECIFIC
EXPECTATIONS AND DELIVERABLES
FOR THE PROGRAM AND MAKE SURE
THERE'S AN INTENTIONAL APPROACH
TO THE TRAINING AND SELECTION
PROCESS AND SO FORTH.
>> THIS RECOMMENDATION IS TO
STRENGTHEN THE NETWORK
EVALUATION AND CONTINUOUS
IMPROVEMENT.
I WILL SAY AT THE OUTSET THAT
THERE HAS BEEN SIGNIFICANT
IMPROVEMENT OVER TIME WHICH WE
HAVE NOTED.
WE FEEL THIS COULD BE MORE
FORMAL, EXPLICIT AND CONSISTENT.
MANY OF THE WORKING GROUP
RECOMMENDATIONS AS BARBARA
MENTIONED WERE CITED IN PRIOR
EXTERNAL OVERSIGHT BOARD REPORTS
WE REVIEWED TOWARDS THE END WE
COULDN'T FIGURE OUT WHAT HAD
HAPPENED WITH THOSE AND FEEDBACK
FROM THE SITES WAS PRETTY
CONSISTENT.
THEY WERE OFTEN PROVIDED INPUT
THAT WAS SOMEWHAT SOLICITED AND
SOMETIMES SPONTANEOUS BUT MANY
PEOPLE SAID THEY REALLY DIDN'T
KNOW WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THAT
INPUT.
THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEVELOP
IN EXPLICIT FIVE-YEAR EVALUATION
PLAN THAEPT ONSET OF THE NEXT
PLAN ON THE ONSET OF THE NEXT
PHASE OF THE NETWORK AND
SYSTEMIC PROCESSES TO GET
FEEDBACK ACROSS PROGRAM GOALS
AND INCLUDING A PROCESS FOR AT
LEAST ANNUAL INPUT FROM ALL
PARTICIPANTS IN THE NETWORKS.
AND A PROCESS TO GET FEEDBACK
BACK TO THE FRONT LINE OF WHAT
CHANGES ARE BEING MADE AND THINK
THE PLAN SHOULD COME WITH
METRICS TO MONITOR THE PROGRESS
ON THE EVALUATION ITSELF.
AND IN SEEING BEYOND THE SCOPE
OF THE SIX RECOMMENDATIONS WE'RE
MAKING, WE THOUGHT THESE WOULD
BE IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS FOR
NINDS LEADERSHIP INCLUDING THE
COUNCIL TO THINK ABOUT.
NUMBER ONE, ASK THE QUESTION IF
WE WERE DESIGNING A NEUROSCIENCE
CLINICAL TRIAL NETWORK FOR THE
21st CENTURY IS THE CURRENT
ORGANIZATION OPTIMAL?
MAYBE IT IS.
THERE'S ONE NETWORK FOR STROKE
TRIALS ACROSS THE DEVELOPMENT
SPECTRUM THOUGH HEAVILY WEIGHED
IN THE DIRECTION OF PHASE 3
TRIALS AND ONE NETWORK FOR ALL
OTHER NEUROLOGIC CONDITIONS
FOCUSSED MOSTLY ON PHASE 2
TRIALS.
IS THIS OPTIMAL?
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S A
STRATEGIC CONSIDERATION FOR THE
LEADERSHIP TO THINK ABOUT.
THE SECOND PART OF THIS
CONSIDERATION IS THE RAPID
ADVANCES IN EXPERIMENTAL NEURAL
THERAPEUTICS AS A DISCIPLINE.
THERE'S RAPIDLY ADVANCING
TECHNOLOGIC IMPROVEMENTS IN
ANALYTIC SCIENCES, DATA SCIENCES
AND INFORMATICS, BIOMARKERS,
IMAGING METHODOLOGIES, DIGITAL
TECHNOLOGIES AND MANY OTHER.
AND THERE'S EXPERTISE FOR THE
ADVANCES.
WE WONDERED WHETHER THERE'S A
MECHANISM TO ENGAGE EXPERTISE IN
OR AT THE CLINICAL SITES TO
AUGMENT WHAT'S AVAILABLE AT THE
NETWORKS.
THESE ARE BIG PICTURE ISSUES FOR
WHETHER THIS IS OPTIMAL FOR
DRIVING ADVANCES IN NEURAL
THERAPEUTICS.
THE NEXT SLIDE IS JUST A
CLARIFICATION AND THERE SEEMED
TO BE CONFUSION IN THE FOCUS
GROUPS AND IN THE INTERVIEWS AND
EVEN ON SOME OF THE SURVEY
RESU
RESULTS WHERE CLINICAL TRIALS
TOOLS AND METHODS IN THE
VALIDATION OF THE TOOLS ARE IN
SCOPE.
THEY SEEM TO BE.
THERE WERE TWO BIOMARKER STUDIES
AS BARBARA MENTIONED IN
NEURONEXT BUT EVEN AT THE
LEADERSHIP LEVEL AT THE CORE
FACILITIES THERE WAS UNCERTAINTY
WHETHER THERE WAS DEVELOPMENT OF
TOOLS, MAKE IT ISN'T, MAYBE IT
IS AND MAYBE IT SHOULDN'T AND
WHAT SHOULD BE TARGETED.
BEFORE CLOSING THIS OFF AND
OPENING FOR QUESTIONS, ED
TREVATHAN PARTICIPATED IN
EVERYTHING WE DID AND HERE AT
THE MEETING AND WONDERED IF
THERE'S THINGS YOU WANT TO
ELABORATE.
>> I JUST WANT TO THANK RICK AND
BARBARA FOR DOING SUCH A
WONDERFUL JOB.
THEY SUMMARIZED IT SMOOTHLY AND
SUCCINCTLY BUT THOUGH WE ONLY
MET ABOUT A LOT TIMES, THERE'S A
LOT OF WORK THEY AND OTHERS DID
OUTSIDE THE MEETINGS.
I WANT TO THANK THEM AND THE
STAFF THAT ARE LISTED ON THE
SLEIGHT SLIDE FOR DOING SUCH A
FANTASTIC JOB OF PROVIDING THE
DATA REQUESTED BY THE GROUP THAT
DID THIS EVALUATION.
THERE'S A LOT OF PRETTY DEEP AND
INSIGHTFUL RECOMMENDATIONS THAT
WILL TAKE TIME TO DIGEST.
I'LL MENTION ONE ASPECT THAT
ILLUSTRATES I THINK RICK
MENTIONED THE ADDITIONAL
RECOMMENDATION
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR EXAMPLE THE
ISSUE OF AUGMENTING THE
EXPERTISE IN THE CORES TO MEET
THE GOALS AND BE MORE EFFICIENT
WHICH IS A CHALLENGE.
YOU MENTION THE LACK OF
PEDIATRIC STUDIES.
THERE'S A NEED FOR MORE
PEDIATRIC CLINICAL TRIALS IN
GENERAL AND NOBODY EXPECTS THESE
NETWORKS TO FULFILL THAT ENTIRE
GAP.
SINCE THE PLATFORMS AND SOME
CLINICAL TRIALS ARE DIFFERENT
FOR CHILDREN THAN ADULTS IT'S A
TALL ORDER TO ASK NEURONEXT AND
STROKE NET TO DO THOSE AND
FULFILL THE NEEDS.
AS THAT'S EVALUATED IN TERMS OF
IMPLEMENTING DOING MORE
PEDIATRIC TRIALS, SOME OF THE
SUGGESTS RICK OUTLINED THE
ADDITIONAL ONES FOR WAYS TO
AUGMENT CORE EXPERTISE MIGHT BE
HELPFUL.
IT'S GOING TO BE THE
IMPLEMENTATION THAT'S GOING TO
BE DIFFICULT.
I WANT TO THANK EVERYBODY FOR
THEIR HARD WORK.
>> WE MAY HAVE TIME FOR COMMENTS
AND QUESTIONS.
>> THIS WAS A GREAT REPORT AND
READING AND THE TWO MAIN THINGS
ARE ELEMENTS THE COMMUNITY HAS
RECOGNIZED.
THERE'S GREAT THINGS THAT HAVE
COME OUT PARTICULARLY AS I SPEAK
OF STROKE NET BUT IT'S BEEN A
VERY TOUGH SLOG TO GET THROUGH
AND HOW TO CAPTURE EMERGING
CUTTING EDGE SCIENCE IF IT'S ALL
INVESTIGATOR INITIATED.
I THINK THE FINDINGS FOR THE
TRIAL GROUP WERE IMPORTANT.
>> ONE THING IS ALMOST ALL THESE
REQUIRE SUPPLEMENTATION TO GET
THE RESEARCH COORDINATOR SUPPORT
REQUIRED TO ENROLL THE PATIENTS
AND FOLLOW THEM IT BECOMES VERY
COSTLY FOR THE INSTITUTION.
THERE'S LITTLE SUPPORT FOR
RESEARCH COORDINATORS LIKE WE'RE
STRUGGLING WITH SLEEP SMART NOW
AND GETTING SPACE IN CLINIC AND
PAYING FOR THAT OUT OF RESEARCH
FUNDS.
I WILL SAY I THINK THERE IS SOME
ADDITIONAL SUPPORT THAT WOULD
ENHANCE ENROLLMENT AND MAYBE I
MISSED IT, DID YOU GUYS TALK
ABOUT EXCEPTION TO INFORMED
CONSENT?
YOU HAVE TO DO THE COMMUNE
OUTREACH AND FACEBOOK AND SAYING
YOU CAN BE IN THE TRIAL AND
THAT'S HELPED WITH STROKE AND WE
FIRST STARTED DOING REMOTE
CONSENT AND SOME TRIALS NOW USE
ETHIC.
IT SEEMS LIKE THE MAJOR ISSUES
AND FUNDING LINES IN GETTING
THEM THROUGH THE SYSTEM.
I THINK THERE'S OTHER THINGS
THAT WOULD PROBABLY MAKE IT MORE
ATTRACTIVE RATHER THAN GOING TO
HIGHER PAYING PER PATIENT
INDUSTRY TRIALS.
>> I WANT TO MAKE A QUICK
COMMENT ABOUT THE ISSUE OF
PATIENT ENGAGEMENT AND COMMUNITY
ENGAGEMENT AND TYING INTO THE
WORK AND DISCUSSION WE JUST HAD
ON EQUITY INCLUSION AND
DIVERSITY.
IT SOUNDS LIKE SO I'M ON
MULTIPLE HEAL ADVISORY
COMMITTEES AND SOUNDS LIKE THE
ISSUES YOU'RE GRAPPLING WITH ARE
THE SAME YOU ARE AND THE TERMS
HAVE BEEN STRUCTURED AFTER THE
TERMS.
AND WHILE I'M IN FAVOR OF
INCORPORATING PATIENT ADVOCACY
GROUPS I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO
THINK MORE BROADLY IN TERMS OF
RECOMMENDATION.
THINKING ABOUT ANYONE THAT WOULD
BE AN END USER OF THE DATA THAT
THESE CLINICAL TRIALS ARE GOING
TO GENERATE.
SO PRIMARY CARE PROVIDERS
ENSURE, SO ON AND SO FORTH.
SO BACKPAC A BACK TRAIN TRIAL
UNDER HEAL HAS DONE THAT WITH
RECOMMENDATION THINKING ABOUT
INCORPORATING COMMUNITY
ENGAGEMENT AND PATIENT
ENGAGEMENT AND OTHER STAKEHOLDER
ENGAGEMENT TO INCLUDE ANYBODY
WHO IS AN END USER OF THE DATA
YOU'RE PUTTING OUT
THE REASON WE WANT TO DO THAT
AND STROKE IS NOT MY AREA OF
EXPERTISE BUT THE IDEA IS WE
WANT TO MAKE SURE THE DATA IS
TRANSLATED TO CLINICAL CARE AND
MAKES CHANGES FOR REAL WORLD
POPULATIONS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE
NOT 10 OR 20 YEARS DOWN THE
LINE.
MY SECOND COMMENT IS THE
IMPORTANCE OF COMMUNITY
ENGAGEMENT NOT JUST FOR
RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION IN
TRIALS BUT ALSO THE OVERALL
IMPROVEMENT WITH WHAT WE JUST
TALKED ABOUT WITH STAKEHOLDER
ENGAGEMENT.
AND MY COMMENT WOULD BE AROUND
MAKING SURE THAT YOU HAVE AGAIN
AS I WROTE IN MY NOVEL IN THE
COMMENTS BEFORE, OFTEN TIMES
INVESTIGATORS ARE NOT TRAINED IN
ENGAGEMENT STRATEGIES AND DON'T
KNOW HOW TO DO IT.
YOU CAN REQUIRE THAT IT'S DONE
BUT OFTEN TIMES IT ENDS UP IN
TOKENISM AND CHECKING THE BOX TO
MAKE SURE YOU HAVE RESOURCES SET
ASIDE AND TRAINING TO MAKE SURE
THE INVESTIGATORS AND COMMUNITY
STAKEHOLDERS INVOLVED IN THE
PROJECT HAVE TRAINING TO DO
ENGAGEMENT THAT'S AUTHENTIC AND
MEANINGFUL AND RESULTING IN A
CHANGE IN RECRUITMENT, DIVERSITY
AND INCLUSION IN THE TRIALS.
>> I WANT TO ADD MY THANKS
FANTASTIC REPORT.
WORKING IN THE PHARMA WORLD, I
THINK ENGAGEMENT BETWEEN NIH AND
PHARMA HAS BEEN GOING ON MORE
THAN 10 YEARS ALREADY WHETHER
IT'S NCATS AND REPURPOSING OF
DRUGS OR THE COALITION AGAINST
MAJOR DISEASES I STRONGLY
SUPPORT GETTING THAT TOGETHER
WHETHER IT'S THROUGH THE
PROPOSAL YOU HAVE OF FORMING
SOME KIND OF A BOARD I'M NOTE
SURE IT'S THE FASTEST -- NOT
SURE IT'S THE FASTEST BUT IF WE
TOOK THAT MUCH TIME FOR IDEAS TO
GO FOR WARD WE'D BE OUT OF
BUSINESS.
THE NUMBERS ARE DEPENDING ON
WHERE YOU ARE 10 TO 15 YEARS AND
$2.5 MILLION TO GO FROM AHA TO A
DRUG WITH A BURN RATE DEPENDING
ON WHO YOU READ, 1 IN 5,000.
THE PHARMA WORLD HAS LEARN THE
HARD WAY HOW TO DO THIS QUICKLY.
AS QUICKLY AS WE POSSIBLY CAN
AND I THINK A STRONGER
PARTNERSHIP HERE IS DEFINITELY
WORTH IT AND WE HAVE EXAMPLES OF
THAT SPECIFIC FOR NINDS.
>> WE DIDN'T EMPHASIZE THIS
THROUGH THE PRESENTATION WHAT
CAME UP IS WHETHER THERE'S A
MECHANISM TO UTILIZE THE
EXCELLENT FACILITIES IN CLINICAL
SCIENCE WITHOUT GOING THROUGHOUT
THE SAME SCIENCE AN INVESTIGATOR
MIGHT GO THROUGH.
WE TALKED ABOUT THAT.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S PRACTICAL
OR DESIRABLE.
IT'S SOMETHING WE DID BRING UP.
>> IT'S A GOOD POINT.
I THINK NECESSITY IS THE MOTHER
OF INVENTION AND YOU HAVE TO
LOOK OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS TO
SEE WHAT THE WORLD WAS ABLE TO
DO WHEN FACED WITH A PANDEMIC.
NOT THAT COLLABORATIONS WEREN'T
THERE BEFORE BUT THERE WAS A
LEVEL OF COLLABORATION THAT
EXCEEDED ANYTHING WE'VE DONE IN
PHARMA AND COLLABORATIONS WITH
THE GOVERNMENT AS WELL.
IT'S WORTHWHILE PURSUING THE
CONVERSATIONS UNTIL YOU HAVE TO
DO IT APPROPRIATELY.
KIDS SUFFERING FROM NEUROLOGIC
AND RARE DISEASES, IT'S A MATTER
OF LIFE OR DEATH AND FOR OTHERS
IT'S QUALITY OF LIFE.
WE'RE LIVING TO EASILY 80 AND 90
AND I KNOW THE NUMBERS HAVE GONE
DOWN BECAUSE OF THE PANDEMIC.
TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE.
WE HAVE WAYS TO DO THIS NOW.
WE NEED TO FIND A WAY TO MAKE IT
WORK BETTER.
>> WITH PEDIATRIC POPULATIONS I
STRONGLY SUPPORT THE STUDIES
RELEVANT IN NEUROLOGY BUT WONDER
THE RECOMMENDATION TO HAVE TOOLS
INCLUDING PEDIATRIC FOR THE
STROKE NET GROUP WOULD BE.
IT'S RARE ENOUGH TO HAVE STROKES
IN CHILDREN BUT TO RECOMMEND
THEY INCLUDE CERTAIN MINIMAL
NUMBER OF TRIALS FOCUSSED ON
CHILDREN.
IS THAT A PRACTICAL
RECOMMENDATION?
>> STROKE IS A RARE EVENT IN
CHILDREN.
OFTEN A PERI EVENT AND THEY COME
VERY LATE SO WE TRIED TO DO A
PDA TRIAL IN THE PEDIATRIC
POPULATION AND IT WAS SUPER
DIFFICULT BECAUSE MANY DON'T
HAVE THAT IN SYMPTOMS OR PRESENT
WITH SEIZURES AND GET MISSED.
I THINK IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT.
I THINK IT'S WORTH DOING MAYBE
IN A HIGH RISK POPULATION LIKE
KIDS WITH CONGENITAL HEART
DEFECTS OR SICKLE CELL.
THOSE ARE IMPORTANT POPULATIONS
AT HIGHER RISK BUT TOUGH TO
ENROLL UNLESS WE HAD EVERY PED
SITE IN THE COUNTRY.
>> AN ISSUE WE ALLUDED TO IS
WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE SITES ATHAT
MAYBE COULD ENROLL QUITE A LOT
OF ADULTS, THE SITES THAT CAN
ENROLL A LOT OF CHILDREN, THEY
AREN'T THE SAME INSTITUTIONS
ALWAYS.
UCSF MAY BE AN EXCEPTION.
IT GETS TO THE QUESTION OF HOW
DO YOU USE THE SAME NETWORK TO
DO BOTH TYPES OF STUDIES.
IT CAN BE A CHALLENGE BUT
THERE'S A FEW.
THEY HAVE PUT TOGETHER PEDIATRIC
STROKE TRIALS.
IT CAN INVOLVE MULTIPLE SITES IN
THE U.S. AND CANADA THOSE
PARTICULAR TRIALS.
>> THERE'S A HUGE AMOUNT TO
DIGEST HERE.
I THINK FORMALLY WE ALSO NEED A
MOTION TO LET COUNCIL ACCEPT
THIS REPORT.
IF YOU CAN VOTE ON THAT IN THE
CHAT.
I'M NOT GOING THROUGH COMMENTS
IN THE CHAT BUT THERE'S
INTERESTING ONES AND KELLY
POINTED OUT THE REPORT IS
AVAILABLE INCLUDING THE SUMMARY
IN THE ECB FOR THOSE WHO WANT TO
LOOK AT IT AGAIN.
>> THIS IS A GREAT CHALLENGE FOR
US TO TRY TO REFINE WHAT WE
BUILT AND NOT JUST LET IT GO
STATUS QUO.
I THINK A LOT OF THESE THINGS WE
THOUGHT ABOUT AND RICK SAID
THEY'VE BEEN IN THE EOB BOARD
MEETINGS AND THE QUESTION IS A
MATTER OF RESOURCES AND GETTING
THE MOMENTUM GOING.
EACH OF THESE IS $11 MILLION A
YEAR FOR INFRASTRUCTURE.
IT SEEMS CLEAR THE
RECOMMENDATIONS WILL HAVE TO ADD
PIECES ON TO MAKE THEM VIABLE IN
THE FUTURE THE NEXT WORKS
COULDN'T TAKE ANYMORE TRIALS.
WE BUILT IT UP AND THEN WE HAD
TOO MUCH AND NOT SURE WHERE THEY
ARE NOW AND THERE'S SOME LEFT
BUT THAT'S THE OTHER THING THAT
SLOWS THINGS DOWN IS ROOM TO PUT
ONE IN.
A LOT OF THINGS WE CAN DO MAKE
THINGS BETTER AND IF WE DON'T
THEY'LL DETERIORATE.
WE GOT THE MESSAGE AND I THINK
WE CAN MOVE THAT FORWARD.
DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU WANTED
TO SAY IN TERMS OF THE REPORT OR
RENEWAL?
>> WE'LL TAKE IT BACK AND GET TO
WORK ON IT.
THERE'S A LOT OF THAT CAN BE
DONE AND ALSO WITH THE
EFFICIENCY YOU MENTIONED IN THE
REPORT THE NETWORK NOT BEING
EVALUATED HERE BUT TAKES IN
ASSETS AND RUNS CLINICALS AND
BECAUSE WE USE A DIFFERENT
MECHANISM WE'RE ABLE TO BRING
THINGS THROUGH MORE QUICKLY.
IT MAY BE POSSIBLE TO USE SOME
OF THOSE MECHANISMS GOING
FORWARD HERE.
SO YEAH, I'M GRATEFUL TO YOU ALL
FOR PUTTING YOUR THINKING CAPS
ON AND PUTTING TOGETHER SUCH A
FANTASTIC REPORT.
THE NETWORKS ARE NEARLY THE END
OF THEIR FUNDING PERIOD.
I THINK WE WANTED TO SINCE I SAW
FROM THE WORKING GROUP A
RECOMMEND TO AT LATEST CONTINUE
THE NETWORKS AND IMPROVEMENT
THEM, BOB, DID YOU WANT TO VOTE
ON THE RENEWAL?
>> THE RENEWAL OF THE NETWORKS,
DO WE NEED TO DO IT AT THIS
COUNCIL OR CAN WE DO IT AT THE
NEXT COUNCIL?
>> THE CONCEPT WE SHOULD DO AS A
GROUP.
SURE I DIDN'T SEE THAT ON THE
LIST AND THIS IS AN INITIAL
CONCEPT BASED ON THE DISCUSSION
AND WONDERFUL REPORT WE HEARD
TODAY AND NEED A MOTION FOR THE
INSTITUTE TO RENEW BOTH STROKE
NET AND NEURAL NEXT
CONSIDERATION AS MANY AS WE CAN
BUDGET LIMITING.
>> I HAVE A QUESTION BEFORE.
IT SEEMS LIKE THE
RECOMMENDATIONS ARE AND THE
QUESTIONS RAISED ARE MAJOR ONES.
SHOULDN'T WE CONSIDER THAT
BEFORE WE -- THAT'S EXACTLY WHY
I HESITATED DISCUSSING HOW IT
TAKE IN THE POINTS.
THAT'S MY HESITATION.
DO YOU NEED TO DO THE RE-ISSUES
NOW IN TERMS OF THESE NOT
LAPSING OR WAIT UNTIL MAY
COUNCIL?
IT'S UP TO YOU.
THE IDEA IS THE APPLICATION
WOULD COME IN AND COUNCIL WOULD
BE ABLE TO REVIEW THE
APPLICATIONS EVENTUALLY.
BUT YEAH, THEY'LL LAPSE IF WE
DON'T AT LEAST --
>> THAT'S ASK ACCEPTANCE WITH
THE CONDITION WE'LL AS SOON AS
POSSIBLE COME BACK TO YOU WITH
AN EXPLICIT REPORT OF WHAT WE
INTEND TO CHANGE IN THE REISSUES
TO MEET THE RECOMMENDATIONS JUST
DON'T LAPSE.
I THINK WE HAVE A MOTION AND
SECOND.
THE MOTION TO RENEW IN THE CHAT
AND YOU CAN VOTE ON THAT.
>> I'LL PICK UP THE PACE.
EACH COUNCIL WE ROTATE BETWEEN
AN UN UPDATE ON THE INITIATIVES
THEN NATIONAL ALZHEIMERS AND
BRAIN IS ON THE DOCKET AND JOHN
NGAI DID TALK AT THE MEETING IN
NOVEMBER.
OUR INTERIM COUNCIL MEETING.
I'LL TURN IT OVER.
>> I'LL TRY TO BE BRIEF AND
LEAVE A FEW MINUTES LEFT FOR
QUESTIONS.
SO I WANT TO GIVE A BRIEF UPDATE
ON WHAT BRAIN HAS BEEN UP TO IN
THE LAST YEAR OR SO.
THE FIRST THING I NEED TO DO IS
TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE AMAZING TEAM
IS THAT SUPPORTS BRAIN ACROSS
ALL TEN OF OUR I.C.s.
I HOPE YOU GET THE IDEA IT'S
BEEN A HUGE TEAM EFFORT.
KUDOS TO EVERYBODY INVOLVED.
WALTER TOUCHED ON BUDGET EARLIER
TODAY AND POINTED OUT THE FUNDS
FROM NINDS.
I'LL GIVE AN OVERVIEW OF THE
BRAIN BUDGET.
THIS SAY BUDGET THAT INCLUDES
PAST YEARS AS WELL AS THE
FORECAST FOR FUTURE YEARS.
WE'RE CURRENTLY IN FISCAL YEAR
2021.
BRAIN FUNDING COMES FROM TWO
SOURCES.
ONE IS THE BASE FUNDING HERE
HIGHLIGHTS IN RED THEY AMEER IN
LINE ITEMS TO THE PARTICIPATING
I.C.s AND IN ADDITION WE HAVE
FUNDS FROM THE 21st CENTURIES
CURES ACT AND VARY FROM YEAR TO
YEAR AND THE CURES ACT FUND WILL
END IN 2026.
I WANT TO POINT OUT A FEW
THINGS.
AGAIN, WE'RE IN FISCAL YEAR
2022.
WE RECEIVED A 100 MILLION
INCREASE TOWARDS THE BASE BUDGET
AND BROUGHT US UP TO $460
MILLION AND $100 MILLION IN
CURES ACT BRINGING US TO ABOUT
$560 MILLION RECOMMENDED FROM
THE REPORT ISSUED.
WE HAVE A LARGE INCREASE IN
CURES ACT FUNDS AND ADDITIONAL
$350 MILLION WHICH ACCORDING TO
THE BUDGET AND WE DON'T KNOW
WHAT'S GOING HAPPEN IN 2023
BRINGING US NORTH OF $900
MILLION AND USING THE FUNDS TO
PLAN FOR LARGE PROJECTS WHICH
I'LL GET TO IN A MOMENT.
AS WALTER MENTIONED WE'RE IN A
CONTINUING RESOLUTION HAVING US
PINNED TO THE LAST YEAR'S BUDGET
AND WE'RE CROSSING OUR FINGERS
AND TOES WE'LL HAVE A RESOLUTION
FOR THE RESOLUTION OF THE YEAR
AND IF THAT GOES TO PLAN WE
SHOULD HAVE A BUDGET NORTH OF
$600 MILLION.
THIS IS IN PROCESS AND OUT OF
OUR HANDS BUT HOPEFULLY ALL WILL
WORK OUT FAIRLY SOON.
SO WHAT HAVE WE BEEN UP TO?
WE'VE HAD DISCUSSION TODAY
ALREADY ABOUT OPPORTUNITIES AND
INCLUSIVITY.
BRAIN IS COMMITTED TO ADVANCING
EXCELLENCE THROUGH INCLUSIVITY
AND I'M CONSTANTLY REMINDING
MYSELF AND SENIOR STAFF THE "I"
IN BRAIN STANDS FOR INNOVATIVE
AND ALL WITH AN EYE TOWARDS
DOING BETTER SCIENCE.
WE PUBLISHED A POSITION PIECE ON
THIS TOPIC BACK IN OCTOBER IN
NEURON.
THERE'S THREE PILLARS TO OUR
APPROACH TOWARDS ENHANCING
INCLUSIVITY WITHIN OUR
WORKFORCE.
THE FIRST IS TO TRAIN THE NEXT
GENERATION OF SCIENTIFIC LEADERS
AND WE PARTICIPATE OR HAVE A
NUMBER OF TERMS HERE AND
DOCTORAL PROGRAM AND F99/K00
PATH WAY TO INDEPENDENCE AND K99
TO R00 TRANSITION AWARDS.
THE F99 PROGRAM AND K99 ARE BOTH
DIVERSITY FOCUSSED WHERE THE F99
IS BRAIN SPECIFIC AND IT IS
RESTRICTED TO WOMEN AND PEOPLE
FROM UNDER REPRESENTED GROUPS
AND WE POINT TO EXPAND THE
PROGRAM TO INCLUDE BRAIN TO FUND
LATER STAGE GRADUATE STUDENTS
AND PROVIDE FUNDS TO TRANSITION
TO THE POST-DOCTORAL PHASE.
WE'RE EXCITED ABOUT THAT.
IN ADDITION WE PROVIDE DIVERSITY
SUPPLEMENTS TO CURRENTLY FUND A
BRAIN AWARDS AND THIS IS WITHIN
AN EYE TOWARDS BRINGING IN
PEOPLE FROM DIVERSE BACKGROUNDS
AT MULTIPLE LEVELS.
THIS COULD AT THE COLLEGE LEVEL
OR POST-DOC OR POST-POST DOCK TO
GET THEM INTRODUCED TO THE FIELD
AND GAIN COMPETITIVENESS FOR
COMPETITIVE AWARDS.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING IN THE
TRAINING FIELD AND LOOKING INTO
OTHER OPPORTUNITIES TO EXPAND
THE REACH TO DIVERSIFY OR
WORKFORCE FROM ALL ASPECTS FROM
PERSONAL BACKGROUND AND
INSTITUTIONAL AND GEOGRAPHIC AS
WELL AS DISCIPLINARY
BACKGROUNDS.
WE'RE ALSO TRYING TO FIND WAYS
TO ENGAGE NEW PARTNERS.
AS ONE EXAMPLE WE HAVE A U24 FOA
ON THE STREET THAT SUPPORTS
CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT FOR
DEVELOPING REGIONS AT MINORITY
SERVING INSTITUTIONS AND IDEA
ELIGIBLE INSTITUTIONS.
WE'RE LOOKING FOR GREATER
DIVERSITY TO BRING THESE INTO
THE BRAIN FOLD.
AND COMMITTED TO FOSTERING
ININCLUSIVE ENVIRONMENTS AND
HAVE NINE CURRENT BRAIN FOAs AND
HAVE NEWLY ISSUED FOAs AS THEY
ROLE OUT AND PDP IS BEING TAKEN
UP AND YOU HEARD ABOUT SOME OF
THIS GOING ON AT NINDS.
WE'RE EXCITED ABOUT THIS AND IT
WILL BE WORK IN PROGRESS BUT WE
HOPE TO MOVE THE NEEDLE TO
ENHANCE DIVERSITY, EQUITY
INCLUSION WITH AN EYE TOWARDS
DOING BETTER SCIENCE.
THERE'S BEEN ACTIVITY AND
GROWING IN HUMANS AND INVASIVE
PROCEDURES SUCH AS
INTRAOPERATIVE STUDIES FOR
CLINICAL INDICATIONS AND
HIGHLIGHTED IS A PIECE PUBLISHED
IN SCIENCE MAGAZINE ON THE
WINDOW OF OPPORTUNITY.
WHAT ARE THE WINDOW OF
OPPORTUNITIES FOR PERFORMING
RESEARCH IN HUMAN SUBJECTS
OTHERWISE IMPLANTED WITH
INVASIVE DEVICES AND NOT ONLY
THE ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS.
ABOUT AROUND THIS TIME IT WAS
PUBLISHED IN NEURON ON THE
ETHICAL COMMITMENTS FOR
PERFORMING THIS RESEARCH.
THE CAME FROM COLLEAGUES AS PART
OF THE BRAIN RESEARCH
OPPORTUNITIES IN HUMANS
CONSORTIUM.
AND HERE'S A GROUP OF
INVESTIGATORS BRAIN IS FUNDING
WHO FORMED A CONSORTIUM TO SHARE
ABOUT THE RESEARCH THEY'RE
CONDUCTING.
FROM THE PIECE THERE'S TWO
GUIDING PRINCIPLES.
ONE THAT CLINICAL CARE HAS TO
TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCIENTIFIC
PRIORITIES.
THE PATIENT'S WELL BEING MUST
ALWAYS COME FIRST AND SECOND IS
THE PARTNERS AND THEIR
INVOLVEMENT MUST BE AGREED TO
WILLINGLY WITHOUT UNDUE
INFLUENCE.
FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE
INTRAOPERATING PROCEDURES IS
THERE IMPACT FOR EXPANDING THE
PROCEDURE TO CONDUCT AN
EXPERIMENT?
WHAT CONSTITUTE UNDUE INFLUENCE
AND WHAT'S THE INFLUENCE OF THE
SURGEON AND RESEARCHER ON THE
PATIENT OR THE SUBJECT'S
WILLINGNESS AND AGREEMENT TO
PARTICIPATE AND THIS LAID OUT
NOT JUST THE PROBLEMS BUT
POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS THAT COULD
BE ADOPTED WITHIN THE CONSORTIUM
AND THE RESEARCH PROJECTS MORE
BROADLY.
THERE'S THE MULTI-COUNCIL
WORKING GROUP AND AS WELL AS THE
NEW ETHICS WORKING GROUP AND TO
IDENTIFY AND ASSESS THE IMPACT
OF THE WORK WE DO CRITICAL WITH
REGARD TO INVASIVE PROCEDURES AS
WELL AS PROCEDURES THAT COULD
ALTER HUMAN ATTRIBUTES SUCH AS
AGENCY.
WE MET AND HELD A PANEL
DISCUSSION ON THE ETHICAL
CHALLENGES ON IMPLANTED DEVICE
RESEARCH WITH PARTICIPANTS.
WE HAD PRESENTATIONS FROM THE
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON.
BOTH BRAIN FUNDED INVESTIGATORS
FOCUSSED ON NEURO ETHICAL
ISSUES.
WE HAD A PATIENT PARTICIPANT IN
A STUDY FROM A GROUP IN LOS
ANGELES AT CAL TECH AND WE
LEARNED A LOT ABOUT THE
CHALLENGES AND THE DIFFERENT
PERSPECTIVE
PERSPECTIVES FROM THE SURGEON
AND THE PANEL AND OTHERS
INVOLVED AND HOPE TO HAVE MORE
DISCUSSIONS IN THE FUTURE AND
WILL BRING THAT BACK TO YOU.
NEWG HELPS IDENTIFY AREAS AND
ONE TOPIC ARE THE POST-TRIAL
RESPONSIBILITIES.
WHAT HAPPENS WITH OUR HUMAN
SUBJECTS AFTER A TRIAL IS OVER
AND MANY HAVE A DEVICE IMPLANTED
AND WHAT HAPPENS AFTER AND WHAT
HAPPENS IF THEY WANT IT EX
PLANTED AND WHO IS RESPONSIBLE
FOR THE CARE?
THESE ISSUES ARE COMPLEX AND
WILL BE FACED IN A WORKSHOP
ROLLING OUT RIGHT NOW AND HOPE
TO HAVE THE PUBLIC PHASE IN THE
MIDDLE OF THE CURRENT YEAR.
I HAD THE BRAIN 2.0
TRANSFORMATIVE ASPECTS AND THE
BEHAVIOR REQUIRES OF THE
COMPONENTS AND THE PATTERNS OF
CONNECTIVITY AND WE NEED WAYS TO
TEST HYPOTHESES ABOUT THE
FUNCTION TO BE USED TO LEAD TO
NEW THERAPEUTIC MODALITIES FOR
HUMAN BRAIN DISORDERS.
INSPIRED BY THE WORKING GROUP
REPORT THE OVERARCHING GOAL OF
THE TRANSFORMATIVE PROJECTS IS
TO CHANGE THE TRAJECTORY OF
NEUROSCIENCE RESEARCH BY
PROVIDING NEW TOOLS AND
RESOURCES THAT CAN BE USED TO
STUDY NEURAL CIRCUITS ACROSS THE
BRAIN AND TO DO SO AT GREATER
DEPTH AND SCALE.
THIS SHIFTS THE EMPHASIS FROM
MOUSE TO HUMAN AND NON-HUMAN
PRIMATE BRAINS.
THE SECOND IS THE WHOLE BRAIN
MAMMALIAN BRAIN CONNECTIVITY
PROJECT TO GENERATE A DIAGRAM AT
DIFFERENT SCALES AND
RESOLUTIONS.
AND TOOLS FOR GAINING PRECISION
ACCESS TO BRAIN CELL TYPES TO
ALLOW THE INTERROGATION AND
MODULATION OF MOLECULARLY
DEFINED CELL TYPES AND CIRCUITS
AND TO GIVE AN UPDATE ON THE
STATUS OF THE PROJECTS.
I THINK I SHOWED SOME VERSION OF
THE SLIDE THIS PAST NOVEMBER.
THE BRAIN INITIATIVE INFORMATION
PROJECT AND ATLAS NUMBER AND
THIS WILL BUILD ON THE SUCCESS
OF THE MOUSE CENTRIC BRAIN
INITIATIVE CELL CENSUS NETWORK
AND SHIFT THE EMPHASIS TO BIG
BRAINS.
WE RECEIVED APPLICATIONS FOR THE
FIRST THREE RFAs.
THEY'RE BEING REVIEWED SOON AND
WILL BE HOPEFULLY FUNDED BY THE
END OF THE YEAR.
THE SECOND IS THE RESOURCES AND
BRAIN CELL TYPE ACCESS AND
MANIPULATION ACROSS THE
SO-CALLED CELL TYPE
ARMAMENTARIUM AND AGAIN THE LONG
RANGE GOAL IS TO DEVELOP NEW
THERAPEUTIC TECHNOLOGIES FOR
HUMAN BRAIN DISORDERS.
WE ALREADY FUNDED THE FIRST
TRANCHE OF APPLICATIONS AND THE
SECOND ROUND IS GOING TO BE
UNDER REVIEW SOON.
AND FINALLY THE WHOLE BRAIN
CONNECTIVITY ANALYSIS TO PROVIDE
A WHOLE BRAIN DIAGRAM IN MAMMALS
AT MULTIPLE SCALES.
I PRESENTED THIS AS A CONCEPT
BACK IN NOVEMBER.
HOPEFULLY YOU'RE FAMILIAR.
BACK IN 2021 WE RECEIVED
CONGRESSAT DIRET
CONGRESSAT DID
CONGRESSIONAL DIRECTED FUNDS.
$40 MILLION WERE DIRECTED
TOWARDS TOOLS AND TECHNOLOGIES
AIMED AT LARGER BRAINS.
THIS IS PUSHED THROUGH EXISTING
RFAs.
ROUGHLY $40 MILLION WAS APPLIED
TO THESE TYPES OF PROJECTS AND
WILL GIVE US A LEG UP AND WE PUT
$16 MILLION TOWARDS FOUR AWARDS,
THREE OF WHICH WERE THROUGH THE
ARMAMENTARIUM RFA.
EXCITED ABOUT THE PROJECTS AND
GRATEFUL TO CONGRESS FOR GIVING
US ADDITIONAL FUNDS LAST YEAR IT
GET THESE UNDERWAY.
NOW TWO HIGHLIGHTS AND TOGETHER
AS WELL AS THE OTHER SCIENTIFIC
HIGHLIGHTS.
I DON'T KNOW IF WALTER PRESENTED
THIS LAST TIME THIS WAS ONE OF
HIS TOP PAPERS FROM 2021.
THE CELL CENSUS NETWORKS SEFT
PAPERS IN THE OCTOBER ISSUE OF
NATURE IN 2021.
FULL DISCLOSURE, BEFORE I JOINED
NIH IN MAY OF 2020, I WAS A P.I.
WITHIN THIS AMAZING GROUP OF
INVESTIGATORS.
HERE WE HAVE A MULTI-MODAL
ANALYSIS OF THESE PRIMARY MOTOR
CORTEX AND WE LEARNED ABOUT THE
ORGANIZATION OF DOING TEAM
SCIENCE THAT SETS THE STAGE FOR
COLLABORATIVE EFFORT TO CREATE A
COMPREHENSIVE ATLAS OF THE HUMAN
BRAIN.
WE PERFORM THE MORTAR -- MOTOR
CORTEX AND INTEGRATING THE
MOLECULAR CHARACTERISTICS FROM
EPIGENOMICS WITH SPATIAL
DISTRIBUTION AND PHYSIOLOGY AND
CONNECTIVITY.
WE FOUND SOME KEY ORGANIZATIONAL
PRINCIPLES UNDERLYING THE
DIVERSIFICATION OF BRAIN CELL
TYPES.
THERE'S THE CELL TYPES BETWEEN
MOUSE AND HUMANS SETTING THE
STAGE FOR THE HUMAN BRAIN CELL
ATLAS AND WE FOUND INTERESTING
DIFFERENCES.
I THINK YOU'LL FIND THAT
FASCINATING.
AND FINALLY, THE RECOGNITION OF
THE POWER OF TEAM SCIENCE WHICH
CULMINATED AN A PLAYINGSHIP
PAPER CAME ABOUT FROM THE
EFFORTS OF OVER 250 RESEARCHERS
FROM OVER 45 INSTITUTIONS AND I
BELIEVE IT'S UNPRECEDENTED IN
THE FIELD OF NEUROSCIENCE.
IT'S ACCEPTED IN POWERFUL IN
OTHER FIELD SUCH AS ASTRONOMY
AND PHYSICS AND HOPING TO USE IT
AS A MODEL TO DEVELOP RESOURCES
FOR EXAMPLE THE HUMAN CELL ATLAS
AND CONNECTIVITY MAPS TO BENEFIT
THE FIELD AS A WHOLE.
THERE'S MORE GREAT STUFF COMING
AND I STEPPED AWAY BUT THEY'RE
DOING GREAT STUFF I HOPE WE'LL
BE READING ABOUT IN THE NEXT
YEAR OR SO.
IN TERMS OF DEVELOPING METHODS
FOR GENE DELIVERY TO THE BRAIN.
ONE OF THE PREFERRED METHODS IS
TO USE VIRAL VECTORS AS WELL AS
DEVELOPMENT OF NANO PARTICLES
TOO.
FOR THE DEVELOPMENT IN
PARTICULAR OF ADENO ASSOCIATED
AS A VECTOR AND DRIVING BRAIN
SPECIFIC GENE EXPRESSION AND
USED BOTH FOR INTEGRATING AND
MODULATING NEURAL CIRCUITS AND
CREATING AND IDENTIFY VARIANTS
WITH DIFFERENT TROPISMS.
ONE OF THE BIG BREAKTHROUGHS
VIVIANA'S LAB IS CAPSIDS TO
ACROSS THE BLOOD BRAIN BARRIERS
AND CAN INJECT INTO THE BLOOD
STREAM.
IT'S A GREAT DELIVERY ROUTE BUT
THERE'S CHALLENGES IN TERMS OF
TOXICITY AND INAPPROPRIATE OR
UNDESIRED TARGETING TO SYSTEMS.
THEY'VE LOWER TARGETING TO THE
LIVER.
THESE ARE VARIOUS SECTIONS AND
HERE ARE DIFFERENT AND THE ROLES
ARE DIFFERENT CAPSID VARIANTS
DRIVING GFP AND YOU SEE GOING TO
THE BRAIN BUT NOT LOCALIZED OR
EXPRESSING IN THE LIVER.
THEY HAVE A VARIANT THAT TARGETS
ASTROCYTES AND DENDDROCYTES AND
THE SPECIFICITY OF THIS
IDENTIFIED CAPSID VARIANT ALLOWS
TARGETING TO BRAIN CELL TYPES IN
MARMOSET BRAINS AND LIVERS AND
GIVES THE ABILITY TO ACROSS
TYPES AND IN NON-HUMAN PRIMATES
WHICH IS AN IMPORTANT STEPPING
STONE IN DEVELOPING THERAPIES IN
HUMANS.
TO QUICK RESEARCH HIGHLIGHTS.
I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT TWO PAPERS
PUBLISHED IN NATURE AND MEDICINE
LAST FALL.
THIS PAPER IS FROM EDDIE CHANG'S
GROUP THE IMPLANTED INTO A
PATIENT WITH SEVERE TREATMENT
RESISTANT DEPRESSION, A SERIES
OF ELECTRODES AND FOUND WITH
DIFFERENT STIMULATION PARAMETERS
WERE ABLE TO AMELIORATE
DEPRESSION SYMPTOMS OF THAT
PATIENT.
WE CAN SEE THE PROMISE AND
POSSIBILITY OF EXTENDING DEEP
BRAIN STIMULATION FROM MOVEMENT
DISORDER TO NEAR PSYCHIATRIC
DISORDER AND TO REMIND THE MORE
WE KNOW ABOUT THE CIRCUITS
INVOLVED IN THESE DISORDERS, THE
BETTER WE'LL ABLE TO TARGET THEM
AND HAVING MARKERS TO TUNE THE
THERAPIES WOULD BE OF IMPORTANCE
FOR THE FUTURE AND IN THIS
REGARD HERE'S A PAPER FROM A
MULTISITE TEAM WHERE THEY WERE
ABLE TO RECORD OVER 1,000 HOURS
OF ACTIVITY FROM FIVE PATIENTS
WITH OCD AND THIS WITH US DONE
IN THE LAB AND IN THE HOME.
THE GOAL OR HOPE IS THAT WE CAN
IDENTIFY OR THEY CAN IDENTIFY
NEURAL SIGNATURES RELATED TO
CERTAIN PATHOLOGICAL STATES THAT
CAN BE USED IN ADAPTIVE
THERAPIES TO CONTROL THOSE
SYMPTOMS.
SO STAY TUNED.
I THINK THIS IS AN EXCITING AREA
OF RESEARCH AND WE'RE LOOKING
FORWARD TO SEE HOW THE FIELD
MOVES FORWARD IN THESE VARIOUS
DOMAINS.
I WANT TO POINT OUT A FEW NEW
FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES THE BRAIN
INITIATIVE IS PUTTING OUT RIGHT
NOW OR HAS ON THE STREET.
WE HAVE AN ONGOING SERIES OF
DISSEMINATION U24 GRANTS AND
IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO GET OUR
TECHNOLOGIES OUT THERE TO
DISSEMINATE THEM AND DEMOCRATIZE
THEM FOR ALL WHO WISH TO USE
THEM.
WE PARTNERED WITH THE PROGRAM
THAT WILL ASSIST EARLY STAGE
DEVELOPMENT IN CLINICAL STUDIES.
WE HAVE AN ONGOING SERIES OF R25
RFA THAT ADDRESSES RESEARCH,
EDUCATIONAL TRAIN AND A CALL FOR
ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENTS FOR
SUPPORTED RESEARCH AND AS I
PRESENTED TO YOU IN THE FALL,
AND THE CONCEPT PRESENTATION WE
HAVE THIS BRAIN INITIATIVE
CONNECTIVITY ACROSS SCALES BRAIN
CONNECTS TERMS.
WE ISSUED THREE NOTICES OF
INTENT TO PUBLIC FOR
COMPREHENSIVE CENTERS AS WELL AS
SPECIALIZED TECHNOLOGIES TO
DEVELOP TOOLS TO BE USED TO
GENERATE WHOLE BRAIN
CONNECTIVITY MAPS AND EXPECT THE
RFAs TO HIT THE STREET IN THE
NEXT FEW MONTHS AND LOOKING FOR
A DUE DATE OF SUMMER 2022.
WE HAVE A FEW UPCOMING WORK
SHOPS IN EARLY MARCH.
WE HAVE A BRAIN BEHAVIOR
QUANTIFICATION SYNCHRONIZATION
MEETING AND HERE THE IDEA IS TO
EXPLORE NEW OPPORTUNITIES IN
DEVELOPING TECHNOLOGIES AND
COMPUTATIONAL METHODS AS WELL AS
ETHICS TO BETTER UNDERSTAND THE
NEURAL BEHAVIOR BY COMBINING AND
SYNCHRONIZING THE STUDY OF
NEURAL ACTIVITY WITH BEHAVIORAL
OUTPUTS AND IT WILL BE DONE
ACROSS SPECIES INCLUDING HUMANS
AND NON-HUMAN MODELS.
A BRAIN ACROSS THE LIFE SPAN
WORKSHOP IS BEING STOOD UP BY
OUR COLLEAGUES AT NICHD AND THE
BILL AND MELINDA GATES
FOUNDATION TO LOOK AT THE STATE
OF THE ART TOOLS AND METHODS FOR
IDENTITY AND OTHER ASPECTS OVER
THE LIFE SPAN.
AND FINALLY, I WANT TO DRAW YOUR
ATTENTION TO OUR BRAIN
INITIATIVE MEETING HELD JUNE
21-22.
WE'RE CROSSING ALL OF OUR
FINGERS AND TOES TO HOLD THIS AS
A HYBRID MEETING AND WILL KNOW
MORE IN MARCH.
SO FAR WE HAVE THREE TERRIFIC
KEY NOTE LECTURES LINED UP.
ONE FROM U.C. BERKELEY AND ONE
FROM UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON
AND THE THIRD FROM DUKE
UNIVERSITY.
SO STAY TUNED.
I THINK THIS IS ALREADY UP ON
OUR WEBSITE AND YOU MAY RECEIVE
AN EMAIL BLAST IF YOU'RE ON THE
RIGHT MAILING LIST.
FOR MORE INFORMATION FIND US ON
THE WEBSITE AND IF YOU DON'T
MIND MORE TRAFFIC IN YOUR E-MAIL
INBOX SIGN UP FOR THE BLAIN
BLOG.
I'LL STOP THERE AND IF THERE'S
TIME FOR QUESTIONS I'M HAPPY TO
ENTERTAIN THEM.
>>
>> MOSAIC WHAT IS THAT?
>> IT'S ON TOP OF THE K99s AND
WE'RE NOT YET PLUGGED INTO THAT.
>> TO WHAT EXTENT IS THE BRAIN
INITIATIVE EFFORTS INTEGRATED
WITH OR SEPARATE FROM WHAT'S
HAPPENING AT THE INSTITUTE?
>> THE ALEN INSTITUTE IS ONE OF
OUR GRANTEES.
WE HAVE MANY PROJECTS OVER THERE
AND CONSIDER THEM TO BE A STRONG
PARTNER.
THEY DO A LOT OF IN GENERAL.
I THINK IT'S FROM MY PERSPECTIVE
IT'S A WONDERFUL RELATIONSHIP.
WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE IT STRONGER
AND STRONGER.
IN TERMS OF OUR GRANTING WE FUND
WHAT WE BELIEVE IS GOING TO BE
THE MOST IMPACTFUL SCIENCE AND
WE CAN GET INTO IMPACT.
THEY'VE BEEN A GREAT PARTNER AND
CONTRIBUTED A LOT OF RESOURCES
TO THE FIELD AND WE'RE GLAD TO
HAVE THEM.
>> THE MOTOR CORTEX SERIES WAS
PHENOMENAL AND HAVE YOU
PROTEOMIC STUDIES.
WHAT WE SEEM TO BE MISSING WAS
PROTEOMICS.
IS THERE A WAY IT TO INTEGRATE
INTO THAT DATABASE?
>> MEASURING GENE LEVELS AND
CHROMATIN IS COMPARED TO THAT
SCALE.
PROTEOMICS IS THE KEY MISSING
LINK TO WHAT MAKES A CELL A
CELL.
WE'RE VERY ENTHUSIASTIC ABOUT
SEEING MORE WORK DONE IN THAT
AREA AND CAN SUPPORT MORE THAT
WILL ADD TO THE CAUSE AND THIS
IS THE PURPOSE BEYOND THE UL 1s
FOR TECHNOLOGIES THAT AREN'T
QUITE AT SPEED BUT IF WE DO
DEVELOP THEM THEY CAN CONTRIBUTE
AND THE ONES WE'RE LOOKING TO
FUND.
>> LAST QUESTION.
CHRIS.
>> ALLEN TOOK UP ALL MY TIME.
>> TAKE YOUR TIME.
>> JOHN, THANK YOU SO MUCH.
I'M CONTINUALLY INSPIRED BY ALL
YOU'RE ACCOMPLISHING.
AND IT'S GREAT TO SEE YOU'RE
INCORPORATING MORE DIVERSE
STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVES AS YOU
MOVE INTO BRAIN 2.0.
MY QUESTION IS ABOUT THAT NOW
THAT THERE MAY BE I REALIZE PAST
AND CURRENT STUDIES ARE BASIC
SCIENCE ORIENTED AND CAN BECOME
MORE CHALLENGING TO INCORPORATE
AND OTHER PERSPECTIVES INTO THAT
TYPE OF RESEARCH BUT NOW YOU'RE
MOVING MORE INTO SOME CLINICAL
RESEARCH.
I'M WOV
I'M WONDERING AFTER RECEIVING
INPUT FROM OTHER STAKEHOLDERS IF
YOU HAVE SOME SORT OF
ESTABLISHED OR THINK ABOUT SOME
SORT OF ESTABLISHED ADVISORY
BOARD OR SOME WAY THAT THOSE
PERSPECTIVES ARE HELPING YOU
GEAR THINGS AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL
OR ARE YOU RELYING MORE ON YOUR
PLAN FOR DIVERSITY TO INCLUDE
THAT WITHIN INDIVIDUAL STUDIES
BUT NOT NECESSARILY AS THE UPPER
UMBRELLA IN ADVISING BRAIN OR
BOTH I GUESS.
>> NOT EITHER/OR.
I THAT.
WE HAVE TWO WORKING GROUPS THAT
ADVICE BRAIN AND THE NEURO
ETHICS WORKING GROUP.
WE'RE TRYING TO REPRESENT THE
HUMAN RESEARCH PARTNER PART OF
THIS PIECE.
IT'S CRITICAL.
WHAT BRAIN REPRESENTS OR SITS
ACROSS 10 I.C.s EACH WITH ITS
OWN DISEASE SPECIFIC MISSION.
I THINK THERE ARE OPPORTUNITIES
PEOPLE AND ORGANIZATIONS THAT
CAN REPRESENT THE HUMAN
PARTICIPANT PERSPECTIVE BUT NOT
NECESSARILY THE DISEASE SPECIFIC
PERSPECTIVE AND WE ARE RIGHT NOW
PARTLY ALWAYS LOOKING AT
BRINGING IN NEW PERSPECTIVES
INTO THE WORKING GROUPS.
WE'RE SLOWLY CYCLING PEOPLE OFF.
THE FOLKS THAT AGREED TO COME ON
IN 2014, 2015, THEY GOT
APPOINTMENTS OPPOSED TO YOU
FOLKS HERE SO WE'RE STARTING TO
CYCLE PEOPLE OFF AND THIS IS AN
AREA WE'RE CONSIDERATION
CAREFULLY BUT ALL OF THE ABOVE
REALLY.
A WONDERFUL THING THAT HAPPENED
IN THE HUMANS RESEARCH
OPPORTUNITIES GROUP THEY FORMED
A STRONG CONSORTIUM AND I THINK
THE BEST IDEAS COME FROM THE
GROUND UP AND OUR ROLE IS TO PUT
THEM INTO ACTION.
>> I'LL KEEP MOVING.
YOU CAN SEND JOHN ANY QUESTIONS
YOU WANT EITHER CHAT OR OFFLINE
OR WHATEVER.
TERRIFIC TALK.
I'LL MOVE INTO THE LAST SECTION
THE INITIATIVES WITH CONCEPT
CLEARANCE.
WE ASK CONCEPT CLEARANCE FROM
COUNCIL.
WE'VE BEEN DOING THIS MANY YEARS
BUT IT'S NOW MANDATED BY NIH
STRAENL.
-- CENTRAL.
MOST INITIATIVES WE WANT CONCEPT
CLEARANCE FOR THESE AND TO SAVE
TIME I'LL SAVE THE VOTE ON THE
INITIATIVES UNLESS THERE'S
QUESTIONS ABOUT A PARTICULAR
ONE.
THE FIRST ONE THERE'S TWO
PRESENTATION.
THE FIRST IS FROM OUR SYSTEMS
AND COGNITION CLUSTER WHO IS
GOING TO PROPOSE A REALLY
INTERESTED NEW MODALITY FOR
FUNDING INTERDISCIPLINARY TEAM
SCIENCE.
KAREN, WHY DON'T YOU GET
STARTED.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON.
I'M A PROGRAM DIRECTOR AT NINDS
AND BRAIN INITIATIVE AND HAVE A
NEW FUNDING CONCEPT TO SUPPORT
TEAM SCIENCE AT NINDS.
THE TEAM SCIENCE CONCEPT IS MADE
POSSIBLE BY TEAM WORK I CO-LEAD
THIS EFFORT AND WE'D LIKE TO
THANK OUR TEAM AS WELL AS
MEMBERS OF THE INSTITUTE WHO
GUIDED US ON THE FUNDING
CONCEPT.
THE NEW CONCEPT ABOUT FUNDING
TEAM SCIENCE IS MOTIVATED BY THE
IMPORTANCE OF TEAM-BASED
APPROACHES IN ENHANCING THE
SCIENCE.
FOR EXAMPLE, THERE'S MANY
QUESTIONS AND GOALS IN
NEUROSCIENCE THAT ARE
CHALLENGING AND COMPLEX IN A
TEAM SCIENCE APPROACH AFORWARDS
US THE OPPORTUNITY TO EXTEND
BEYOND THE LIMITATIONS OF THE
SINGLE LAB EFFORT.
ALSO BY LEVERAGING DISCIPLINES
AND EXPERTISE WE CAN TACKLE
NEUROSCIENCE PROBLEMS IN A MORE
COMPREHENSIVE RIGOROUS AND
MECHANISTIC MANNER.
GIVEN THE IMPORTANCE OF TEAM
SCIENCE, WE STARTED OUT BY
ASKING HOW DO WE OPTIMIZE HOW
NINDS SUPPORTS TEAM SCIENCE.
TO ANSWER OUR WORKING GROUP
COMPARED AND CONTRASTED HOW
OTHER INSTITUTES, TERMS AND
FUNDING AGENCIES SUPPORT TEAM
SCIENCE SO WE CAN LEARN ABOUT
THE BEST PRACTICES AND
CHALLENGES ASSOCIATED WITH
TEAM-BASED APPROACHES.
WE WERE ALSO DRIVEN BY THE GOALS
OUTLINED IN THE NINDS STRATEGIC
PLAN FOR RESEARCH SUPPORTING
SCIENCE OF BROAD SCOPE AND
COMPLEXITY AND WOULD LIKE TO
FURTHER MOBILIZE THE SCIENTIFIC
COMMUNITY TO COLLABORATE AND
LEVERAGE THEIR DIVERSE EXPERTISE
AS WELL AS TAKE ADVANTAGE OF
INCREASING KNOWLEDGE BASE AND
TECHNOLOGICAL CAPABILITIES AS WE
HAVE SEEN IN THE BRAIN
INITIATIVE.
SO WE SET OUT TO DESIGN A NEW
TEAM SCIENCE FUNDING OPPORTUNITY
FOR NINDS AND OUR APPROACH WAS
TO TAKE THE BEST FEATURES OF
OTHER TEAM SCIENCE FUNDING
OPPORTUNITIES AS WELL AS DISCARD
WHAT WE DON'T WANT AND LEARN
FROM OUR COLLECTIVE EXPERIENCE
WITH VARIOUS TEAM SCIENCE TERMS
REGARDING THE CHALLENGES AND
OPPORTUNITIES ASSOCIATED WITH
TEAM-BASED APPROACHES.
I'LL BE WALKING YOU THROUGH
THESE STEPS.
FIRST, WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM
OTHER TEAM SCIENCE TERMS.
I'LL HIGHLIGHT SELECT FEATURES
OF CURRENT FUNDING MECHANISMS
THAT INSPIRED US AND TALKING
ABOUT FEATURES THAT COULD BE
IMPROVED.
LET'S START WITH THE FEATURES WE
LIKED.
WE LIKED THE TOPIC AND
APPROACHES ARE DRIVEN BY DPI.
AND THE SCOPE AND SCALE OF THE
PROJECTS CAN COME FROM THE
SINGLE LAB OR MULTI-LEVEL EFFORT
AND CONSISTS OF ONE SET OF AIMS
AND THERE'S FLEXIBILITY IN THE
TOPIC AND WE LIKE THE TEAM
SCIENCE SPECIFIC FEATURES IN THE
GOALS IN REVIEW CRITERIA.
WE ALSO LIKE THESE ARE ALL
REVIEWED IN ONE STUDY SECTION
CONVENED BY NINDS AND INSPIRED
BY THE TEAM SCIENCE PROGRAM
WHICH EMPHASIZES INTEGRATION OF
EXPERTISE TO TACKLE A UNIFYING
GOAL AND IT ENCOURAGING BOLD AND
AMBITIOUS APPROACHES AND THE
EMPHASIS IN SYNERGY AND
COHESIVENESS AND ELEMENTS KEY TO
TEAM SCIENCE EFFORTS SUCH AS A
TEAM MANAGEMENT PLAN AND
EMPHASIZES MULTIPLE P.I.
COLLABORATIONS.
WED LIKE TO TAKE THE FEATURES
BUT NOT THE ONES WE DON'T LIKE
ABOUT THE MECHANISMS.
FOR THE RO1 CAN GET TRICKY.
THE PO1 IS MADE OF A COLLECTION
OF PROJECTS AND CORES WITH ITS
OWN SET OF AIMS AND COULD RESULT
IN PARALLEL EFFORTS AND DRIVEN
BY A SINGLE P.I.
THIS IS UNDER UTILIZED ON
AVERAGE WE FIND THREE PER YEAR
AND THE NUMBER OF APPLICATIONS
WE OF RECEIVED HAVE BEEN
DECLINING.
ALSO THE DIRECT COST LIMIT IS
LIMITED TO TEAM SCIENCE IDEAS.
THE U19 IS SIMILAR TO THE PO 1
AND INTEGRATING EFFORTS AND
LASTLY THE NGMS WOULD HAVE TO BE
CUSTOMIZED TO OUR INSTITUTE'S
INTEREST AND NEXT IS TO LOOK AT
THE CHALLENGES FOR TEAM SCIENCE.
SOME PROJECTS RECEIVED ARE NOT
THE IDEAL TEAM SCIENCE.
SOME TEAM TO BE LARGE RO1s
DRIVEN BY SINGLE P.I. AND
EFFORTS BY MULTIPLE P.I.s.
AND WE WILL EMPHASIZE
INTERDISCIPLINARY COLLABORATIONS
FROM THREE TO SIX P.I.s AND WORK
TOGETHER TO SOLVE A DEFINED
PROBLEM.
SOME TEAM BASED EFFORTS SUFFER
FROM POOR TEAM MANAGEMENT
NEGATIVELY AFFECTING THE
SCIENCE.
WE'LL NEED A TEAM MANAGEMENT
PLAN AND WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE
SUPPORT AND TEAM SCIENCE EFFORTS
ARE A GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR US
TO PROMOTE DIVERSE PERSPECTIVES
AND SO WE ARE BORROWING FROM THE
BRAIN INITIATIVE THIS REQUIRED
ATTACHMENT OF A PLAN FOR ENHANCE
ENHANCING DIVERSE PERSPECTIVE.
BY TAKING THE BEST FEATURES OF
OTHER TEAM SCIENCE FUNDING
MECHANISMS SUCH AS FROM THOSE I
JUST DESCRIBED AND OTHERS AND
PLANNING FOR CHALLENGES
ASSOCIATED WITH TEAM SCIENCE, WE
ARE PROPOSING AN NINDS TEAM
SCIENCE RM1 MECHANISM WITH THE
FOLLOWING FEATURES.
WE WILL EMPHASIZE EFFORTS ACROSS
MULTIPLE INVESTIGATORS WITH
DIVERSE EXPERTISE UNIFIED BY A
COMMON GOAL OR RESEARCH
QUESTION.
AS WE SAY STRUCTURE DETERMINES
FUNCTION AND THIS WILL HAVE ONE
SET OF AIMS IN CONTRAST TO THE
PO1 MADE OF SEVERAL PROJECTS.
THE GOAL IS TO PROMOTE
COHESIVENESS AND SYNERGY AND
STREAMLINES STEPS IN THE PROCESS
INCLUDING WRITING THE REVIEW AND
EASE THE ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN
PREPARING THE BUDGET WHICH CAN
GET CHALLENGING IN A
MULTICOMPONENT STRUCTURE.
WE'RE ALSO INCLUDING THE THREE
COMPONENTS TO SET THE TEAMS UP
FOR SUCCESS.
FIRST IS A TEAM MANAGEMENT PLAN
INCLUDING THE ELEMENTS LISTED
INCLUDING ALLOTMENT OF RESOURCES
FOR PROGRAM MANAGEMENT AND
COORDINATION ACROSS LABS AND ASK
FOR A TIME LINE AND BENCHMARKS
FOR SUCCESS.
THIS IS WHERE TEAMS WILL DEFINE
THEIR FIVE-YEAR OUTCOMES AND
THIS INFORMATION WILL HELP THE
STUDY SECTION REVIEW FOR
FEASIBILITY AND HELP EVALUATE
PROGRESS.
BORROWING FROM THE BRAIN
INITIATIVE WE'RE REQUIRING A
PLAN FOR ENHANCING DIVERSE
PERSPECTIVES AND YOU'VE HEARD
ABOUT THIS TODAY.
TO PROVIDE FLEXIBILITY AND THE
RESOURCES BE REQUESTED BY
SCIENCE WE'LL NOT CAP THE BUDGET
PER PROJECT BUT WE'LL CAP OUR
SPENDING TO $10 MILLION FOR NEW
AWARDS FOR FISCAL YEAR.
AND FOR OUR PILOT PHASE, WE'LL
OFFER ONE RECEIPT DATE PER YEAR
FOR THREE YEARS.
BECAUSE THESE TERMS WILL HAVE
UNIQUE GOALS IT WILL BE BEST IF
REVIEWED UNDER ONE STUDY SECTION
AND OUR REVIEW BRANCH HAS A
WEALTH OF EXPERIENCE IN
REVIEWING TEAM SCIENCE AND BROAD
NINDS TOPICS.
AND THE OVERSIGHT WILL INCLUDE A
COMBINATION OF PROGRESS REPORTS
AND TELECONFERENCE
PRESENTATIONS.
LASTLY, WHAT KIND OF PROJECTS
WE'D LIKE TO SEE.
OVERALL AS INSPIRED WE LOOK
FORWARD TO RECEIVING PROJECTS
THAT INTEGRATE DIVERSE EXPERTISE
TO CHALLENGE EXISTING PARADIGMS
OVER ROAD BLOCK TO PROGRESS AND
DEVELOP NEW SYNERGIES ACROSS
FIELD TO SOLVE A SPECIFIC
QUESTION OR ADDRESSED A WELL
DEFINED GOAL WITHIN THE MISSION
OF NINDS AND SUPPORT PROJECTS
BRINGING ACROSS TOPICS OR
DISCIPLINES AS WELL AS SOME
OTHER EXAMPLES LISTED HERE.
SO THAT'S ALL FOR ME.
THANK YOU FOR LISTENING AND
WE'RE HAPPY TO HEAR YOUR
QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS.
>> GREAT, KAREN.
ONE QUICK QUESTION AND I FORGOT.
WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT BENCH MARKS
ARE THESE GO/NO-GO BENCH MARKS
OR MARKERS OF PROGRESS.
>> MARKERS OF PROGRESS BUT IT'S
ALSO DEPENDENT ON THE TYPE OF
RESEARCH IF THEY'RE DEVELOPING A
PRODUCT FOR EXAMPLE THEN MAYBE
IT'S BEST TO HAVE A GO/NO-GO.
>> YOU CAN THINK OF THIS AS A
PILOT INITIATIVE BUT IT'S
IMPORTANT SO WE WANT TO SPEND
TIME DISCUSSING IT.
>> THE BUDGET YOU PROPOSED WAS
TOTAL EXPEND YOU'RE FROM NINDS
ON THE PROGRAM AT $10 MILLION A
YEAR?
>> THAT'S CORRECT.
>> THAT'S $10 MILLION DIRECT
COSTS.
>> TOTAL COST.
>> THIS IS NOT VERY DIFFERENT
FROM THE DIRECT CAP FOR PO1s.
YOU SAID LIKE FOUR PROJECTS OR
SOMETHING A YEAR WHEN YOU ADD
INDIRECTS THERE'S THE PROBLEM
WIN THE PO1.
>> THE FOUR TO SIX IS A ROUGH
RANGE FOR US BUT WE ARE FLEXIBLE
AND THE P.I.s CAN ASK WHATEVER
THEY NEED AS LONG AS IT'S
JUSTIFIED.
>> THERE WERE FIVE PROJECTS AND
SAY THEY AVERAGE $2 MILLION
TOTAL COSTS THAT WOULD BE LIKE
$1.3 MILLION DIRECT COSTS.
IT WOULD BE A LITTLE BIT BIGGER
THAN A PROGRAM PROJECT BUT AS
KAREN SAID, AN INDIVIDUAL
PROJECT COULD BE MORE THAN $2
MILLION.
THERE'S NOT A FIXED RULE.
>> EXACTLY.
>> KEN.
>> KAREN, I LOVE THIS APPROACH.
YOU CAN'T WORK IN PHARMA WITHOUT
TEAM SCIENCE.
I'M WONDERING IF YOU'RE THINKING
TO CROSS-INSTITUTION APPROACHES
FOR THE RM1 BECAUSE IT SEEMS
LIKE IT ALREADY EXISTS AT ONE
OTHER INSTITUTE AND WONDERING IF
IT WOULD WIDEN YOUR SCOPE AND
RESOURCES BECAUSE THERE'S
NATURAL PLACES NINDS CAN PARTNER
SO YOU CAN REALLY BROADEN THAT
UP AND BRING MORE RESOURCES IN
AND INCREASE THE CAPACITY FOR
PARTNERING.
>> THAT'S MY DREAM.
I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THAT.
MY GUESS IS OTHER INSTITUTES
WOULD LIKE TO SEE HOW THIS PLAYS
OUT AND DEPENDING ON THE SUCCESS
OF THE PROGRAM MAYBE WE'LL HAVE
MORE EVIDENCE FOR THEM TO JOIN
US.
IT'S DIFFERENT TO DO THESE
CO-FUNDING ACROSS INSTITUTE.
MAYBE THE BLUEPRINT WILL HAVE
SOMETHING LIKE THIS.
>> THIS IS AN AWESOME IDEA.
TEAM SCIENCE IS CRITICAL.
YOU SAID BASIC OR CLINICAL I
DON'T KNOW IF YOU SAID ANIMAL
VERSUS HUMAN OR BOTH.
I'M GUESSING BOTH.
>> YES.
>> IN WHICH CASE IT'S A BROAD
LANDSCAPE AND SO I WONDER IF
THERE'S GOING TOP SOME OTHER
DEFINING ACCESS YOU'RE LOOKING
FOR.
THERE'S A LOT OF PROJECTS THAT
COULD FALL UNDER THIS TYPE OF
GENERAL RUBRIC.
IS IT MECHANISTIC, CIRCUIT
BASED?
ARE THERE OTHER AREAS YOU THINK
YOU'LL HIGHLIGHT FIRST?
GIVEN THERE'S ONE A YEAR I
IMAGINE THERE'LL BE A LOT OF
APPLICATIONS.
I WONDER IF SOME SPECIFIC
GUIDANCE WOULD BE HELPFUL.
>> SO I'M HOPING THERE'LL BE A
LOT OF APPLICATIONS.
THERE'LL BE PURPOSELY MADE TO BE
INVESTIGATOR INITIATED SIMILAR
TO THE PO1 WHERE IT'S NOT
CONSTRAINED AS OTHER DIRECTED
TERMS.
THAT'S THE INTENTION IS TO MATCH
THOSE INVESTIGATOR INITIATED
TYPE OF FUNDING MECHANISMS.
AND FOR FOCUS, I GUESS WHAT WE
COULD DO WITH THE P.I.s IS WHEN
WE'RE PROVIDING GUIDANCE IS THAT
IF IT FITS BETTER IN A CERTAIN
TYPE OF OTHER PROGRAM, FOR
EXAMPLE, WITH THE BRAIN
INITIATIVE TYPE OF TEAM SCIENCE,
THEN WE'LL DIRECT THE P.I. OVER
THERE BUT THIS ONE IS MORE
UNCONSTRAINED.
IT'S BY DESCRIBE IT'S
INVESTIGATOR INITIATED.
>> SOME PRE-DISCUSSION WILL BE
IMPORTANT FOR THIS ONE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
I'M NOT GOING RUSH THIS
DISCUSSION.
>> ONE CAN IMAGINE IF YOU LOOKED
AT THE NINDS PORTFOLIO AT
INDIVIDUAL RO1s, ONE COULD
ALMOST CREATE THE THYME TYPE OF
PROGRAM YOU'RE LOOK FOR FROM
FIVE OR SIX OF THE EXISTING
OUTSTANDING RO1s.
I WONDER IF THERE'S ANY WAY TO
TRY TO CREATE THAT BY GETTING
THOSE FOLKS TO INTERACT.
>> WE DO SEE THE TEAM SCIENCE
COME IN IN THE MULTI-P.I. RO1
BUT COMING INTO A TEAM SCIENCE
SPECIFIC FOA WE'LL WANT TO SEE
HOW THEY'RE INTERACTING TOGETHER
AND THE PLAN FOR DIVERSITY.
>> I UNDERSTAND THAT BUT WHEN
SOMEONE'S SITTING WITH AN RO1
AND SAY I DON'T WANT TO BE THE
PERSON TO PUT THIS TOGETHER
WHETHER THEY CAN REACH OUT TO
FUNDEES AND SAY LOOK, THIS IS A
POTENTIAL OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU TO
WORK TOGETHER BECAUSE YOU'RE
CLEARLY WORKING ON THE SAME
QUESTION YOU'RE DOING IT
COMPLETELY INDEPENDENTLY.
>> IT'S AN INTERESTING IDEA.
THERE'S A FINE LINE BETWEEN
SELECTING P.I.s AND SUGGESTING
THIS IMPRESSION OF GIVING
FAVORITISM OR LEG UP ON ONE
GROUP BUT IF ANY P.I. WAS
TALKING TO THEIR PROGRAM
DIRECTOR AND THINKING WHAT TO DO
NEXT FOR THE RO1 WE CAN TELL
THEM ABOUT THE OPPORTUNITY AND
LET THEM PICK WHO THEY WANT
THEIR COLLABORATORS TO BE UNLESS
THEY ASK A QUESTION LIKE WHO DO
YOU THINK I MIGHT COLLABORATE
WITH.
WE HAVE TO BE A LITTLE CAREFUL
ABOUT NOT BEING TOO HEAVY HANDED
FOR AN R MECHANISM.
IT'S DIFFERENT FOR CONTRACTS.
>> KAREN, DOES THAT MAKE SENSE?
>> EXACTLY.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.
I WILL ASK FOR A VOTE.
IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE
FURTHER PURSUING THIS MECHANISM?
A SECOND?
WE NEED A MOTION IN THE CHAT FOR
SPECIFICALLY FOR THE RO1 AND
EVERYONE TO VOTE.
THANKS A LOT AND FOR THE CONCISE
PRESENTATION, KAREN.
THE OTHER THING WE'LL BRIEFLY
TALK ABOUT IS THERE'S A BUNCH OF
NEW INITIATIVES FOR ALZHEIMER'S
DISEASE AND RELATED DEMENTIAS.
THIS IS USING MONEY FROM NIA AND
THEY ALLOW US TO USE ROUGHLY 10%
OF THE LARGE ALZHEIMERS
APPROPRIATION.
SO WE'RE NOT GOING GO THROUGH
ALL THE INITIATIVES.
THEY'RE MOSTLY NEW ISSUES BUT I
THOUGHT IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA
FOR ROD TO TALK ABOUT THE
PROCESS THAT GIVES RISE TO THE
INITIATIVES AND HOW THEY'RE
VETTED BY THE TWO INSTITUTES.
ROD.
>> CAN YOU HEAR ME AND SEE ME
OKAY.
>> WE CAN HEAR YOU AND SEE YOU.
>> ALL RIGHT.
THANKS.
THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO
TALK ABOUT THE CONCEPT CLEARANCE
TODAY.
A REMINDER AND HELPS TO GROUND
IN THIS THAT DEMENTIA IS A
NATIONAL EMERGENCY WITH MORE
THAN 5.5 MILLION AMERICANS THAT
HAVE A DIAGNOSIS OF ALZHEIMER'S
DISEASE ALONE.
THIS IS GOING TO INCREASE AS OUR
POPULATION AGES.
IT AFFECT THE HEALTH, FINANCES
AND WELL BEING OF INDIVIDUALS
AND FAMILIES AND GROUPS AND
COMMUNITIES OF OUR SOCIETY.
CONGRESS HAS CHOSEN TO ACT AND
THE NATIONAL ALZHEIMER'S ACT AND
APPROPRIATIONS OFFER HISTORIC
OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS
ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE AND
ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE RELATED
DEMENTIAS.
THE NIH'S APPROACH TO THIS IS
THAT THE NIA IS THE LEAD OVERALL
FOR THE NIH RESPONSE TO THE
NATIONAL PLAN.
THE NINDS AND NIA COLLABORATE
CLOSELY TOGETHER IN THE CONTEXT
THIS IS A TRANS-NIH INITIATIVE.
THERE'S SUMMITS FOR ALZHEIMER'S
DISEASE AND ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE
RELATED DEMENTIAS.
THOSE BEING LEWY BODY DEMENTIA
AND DEMENTIA CARE SUMMITS.
THEY RESULT IN IMPLEMENTATION
MILESTONES GOING TO THE NATIONAL
PLAN TO ADDRESS ALZHEIMER'S
DISEASE AND ADVANCE THE GOAL OF
MEETING GOAL ONE TO PREVENT AND
TREAT ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE AND
DEMENTIA BY 2025.
THE NINDS LEADS THE ALZHEIMER'S
DISEASE RELATED DEMENTIA SUM
MITS.
THEY'RE PLANNING EFFORTS THAT
DEVELOP RESEARCH RECOMMENDATIONS
AND A THINK TANK PROCESS AND AS
YOU KNOW I THINK YOU KNOW, THE
ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE RELATED
DEMENTIA SUMMIT IS A PROCESS AND
I WANT TO THANK FOR THE EFFORTS
PARTICIPATING IN THE WORKING
GROUP.
DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS ARE
DEVELOPED BY COMMITTEES AND WE
HAVE A REQUEST FOR INFORMATION
THAT'S PUBLIC AND THE DRAFT
RECOMMENDATIONS ARE DEVELOPED
AND PRESENTED AT THE SUMMIT
ITSELF FOR FURTHER PUBLIC INPUT.
THE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE THEN
SUBJECT AND PRESENTED IN A
REPORT TO THE NINDS COUNCIL.
YOU'LL BE SEEING THAT REPORT I
THINK AT SEPTEMBER COUNCIL AND
IF THE REPORT IS APPROVED BY
THIS COUNCIL, THE NINDS DELIVERS
THOSE MILESTONES TO THE
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN
SERVICES FOR INCLUSION IN THE
NATIONAL PLAN.
THE MILESTONES FROM OTHER
SUMMITS INFORM THE ALZHEIMER'S
DISEASE AND ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE
RELATED DEMENTIAS BYPASS BUDGETS
DELIVERED BY NIH TO CONGRESS.
THE NEXT SUMMIT IS MARCH 22 TO
23.
NATALIA ROAST IS OUR SCIENTIFIC
CARE AND AN ENCOURAGE EVERYONE
TO REGISTER AND ATTEND.
IT'S A WONDERFUL OPPORTUNITY FOR
PEOPLE TO BE OPEN AND PROVIDE
INPUT THAT HELPS SHAPE THESE
RECOMMENDATIONS THAT INTERN HAVE
A SIGNIFICANT IM -- IN TURN HAVE
AN IMPACT IN SCIENCE AND CURING
AND TREATING ALZHEIMER'S AND
ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE RELATED
DEMENTIAS.
10% OF THE CONGRESSIONALLY
MANDATED FUNDS ARE BETWEEN THE
TWO INSTITUTES.
IT'S A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF
MONEY AT THIS POINT.
AS OF FISCAL 2021, IT'S ABOUT $3
BILLION COMING TO THE NIA AND
YOU CAN SEE THE AMOUNT OF MONEY
THAT GOES INTO ADRD FROM THE
REGULAR FUNDS IN BLUE AND THE
ADDED FUNDS IN GOLD.
YOU CAN SEE HERE IT'S A NUMBER
OF YEARS IN FACT ABOUT THREE
YEARS AFTER FUNDS BECAME
AVAILABLE FROM CONGRESS.
THESE FUNDS ARE USED TO SUPPORT
RESEARCH THAT'S RESPONSIVE TO
ADRD INITIATIVES THAT ARE BASED
IN THE MILESTONES.
AS WELL AS INCREASED
INVESTIGATOR INITIATED RESEARCH.
YOU CAN SEE THE DOLLAR AMOUNTS
IN THE TWO ARE RELATIVELY
BALANCED AND I ENCOURAGE
INVESTIGATORS TO CONSIDER
APPLYING FOR THE PARENT RO1 OR
OTHER INVESTIGATOR INITIATED
RESEARCH MECHANISMS.
WE'VE HAD ADRD SUMMITS AND THE
FOURTH COMING IN 2022.
REGISTER FOR THE SUMMIT.
WE'VE HAD MORE THAN -- WE'VE HAD
55 NINDS ADRD APPROVED
MILESTONES THAT HAVE GONE INTO
THE NATIONAL PLAN.
59 FUNDING INITIATIVES.
THERE'S BEEN MAJOR TERMS AND
CONSORTIA AND YOU SEE THE LOGOS.
I WANT TO MENTION THAT MANY OF
THESE TERMS ARE EITHER FOCUSSED
SPECIFICALLY ON HEALTH EQUITY OR
HAVE VERY LARGE COMPONENTS THAT
MANDATE HEALTH EQUITY.
THE RESEARCH FUNDING HAS
INCREASED ABOUT FIVE FOLD FROM
2015 TO 2020.
IT'S ABOUT $600 MILLION NOW.
AND THESE TERMS WE HOPE AND
BELIEVE HAVE GUIDED
TRANSFORMATIVE RESEARCH AND
CONTRIBUTED TO NEW ADVANCED
UNDERSTANDING TOWARDS
INTERVENTIONS.
NOW, SINCE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
CONCEPT CLEARANCE, I THINK IT'S
IMPORTANT FOR ME TO SAY A FEW
WORDS HOW FUNDING OPPORTUNITY
ANNOUNCEMENTS FOR ALZHEIMER'S
DISEASE AND RELATED DEMENTIAS
ARE DEVELOPED AT THE NINDS AND
THE STEPS THAT THAT DEVELOPMENT
GOES THROUGH AND THE APPROVALS
AND CONSIDERATIONS AND
ITERATIONS THAT THAT OCCURRED
BEFORE WE GET TO TODAY WHERE
WE'RE ASKING FOR CONCEPT
CLEARANCE.
SO THE MILESTONES AS I MENTIONED
ARE DELIVERED TO THE DEPARTMENT
OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES.
AND WE HAVE MILESTONES FOR
HEALTH EQUITY, FTD, FRONTAL,
TEMPORAL DEMENTIA AND ETIOLOGY
DEMENTIAS AND LEWY BODY DEMENTIA
AND EVERY YEAR STARTING IN THE
SPRING ANNUALLY THE CONCEPTS
BEGIN TO BE DEVELOPED.
PROGRAM STAFF THINKS ABOUT THEM
AND BRINGS THEM TO THE
ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE WORKING
GROUP AND THERE'S DISCUSSION
ABOUT HOW TO MODIFY THE CONCEPTS
AND WHAT WORKS WELL AND WHAT
OUGHT TO BE CHANGED.
THERE'S INPUT FROM THE DIRECTOR
AND FROM THE NIA WITH ME AND
DIRECTOR AND DR. HODES.
IS THE CONCEPT GOES TO
PRE-COUNCIL FOR FURTHER
DISCUSSION AND WE BRING THE
CONCEPTS TO COUNCIL, TO YOU.
WE HOPE THEY'LL BE APPROVED TO
MOVE FORWARD FOR IMPLEMENTATION
AND THAT'S TYPICALLY IN THE
FOLLOWING FISCAL YEAR.
BEFORE I PUT A SLIDE UP THAT
SHOWS THE CONCEPT YOU'VE ALSO I
THINK HAVE SEEN IN THE
ELECTRONIC COUNCIL BOOK, I WANT
TO SAY THAT THIS IS ANOTHER
PROGRAM THAT IS VERY LARGE WITH
A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO PUT A LOT OF
WORK INTO IT.
YOU CAN SEE NAMES OF PEOPLE FROM
ACROSS THE NINDS AND SEE NAMES
OF PEOPLE FROM NIA WE WORK WITH
ROUTINELY.
THANK YOU FOR THE EFFORTS THAT
GO INTO THE PROGRAM.
I'M PUTTING UP THE SLIDE WITH
THE TITLE OF THE FOAs FOR
CONCEPT CLEARANCE TODAY AND THE
NAME OF EACH CONCEPT IS THERE AS
WELL AS THE NAME OF THE LEAD NOR
CONCEPT.
THE NINDS LEADS FOR THE CONCEPTS
ARE AVAILABLE TO TAKE QUESTIONS
AND I OF COURSE CAN TAKE
QUESTIONS TOO AND WITH THAT I
WANT TO PAUSE AND ASK IF ANYBODY
HAS ANY QUESTIONS.
>> ROD, CAN YOU REMIND ME HOW
MANY OF THESE ROUGHLY ARE
RE-ISSUES.
>> THE ONES ON THE BOTTOM, ONE,
TWO, THREE.
>> OKAY.
A QUICK COMMENT AND WE'LL SEE
THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS.
GIVEN THE AMOUNT OF ALZHEIMER'S
MONEY AND THE NUMBER OF ONGOING
INITIATIVES, WE DON'T USUALLY
LOOK AT THESE IN DETAIL AT
COUNCIL.
IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT
THESE, YOU CAN ASK THEM NOW OR
ASK ROD OFFLINE OR DO IT THROUGH
ME WOULD PROBABLY BE THE EASIEST
WAY.
ARE THERE ANY OF THESE OR ANY
OTHER COMMENTS ANYBODY HAS ABOUT
WHAT RODS'BEEN TALKING ABOUT?
OKAY.
I WON'T ASK FOR APPROVAL OF
THESE CONCEPTS GOING FORWARD
THEY'RE ALSO SOMEWHAT DIFFERENT
BECAUSE THEY'RE EXTENSIVELY
VETTED IN MANY FORMS BECAUSE
THEY COME TO OUR COUNCIL SO IT'S
DIFFERENT FROM THE OTHER
INITIATIVES WE SEE.
THANKS A LOT.
ROD.
I'LL FOLD THE VOTE ON THESE INTO
THE FINAL VOTE.
IF THERE'S NO MORE QUESTIONS,
ANDREW, I CHANGE THE ORDER.
NOW CAN YOU PUT UP THE SLIDE YOU
PUT UP IN THE BEGINNING.
THIS IS KIND OF A MISCELLANEOUS
SLIDE THAT CONSISTS ALMOST
ENTIRELY OF RE-ISSUES OF PAST
INITIATIVES WE'RE NOT PROPOSING
TO DISCUSS SO LOOKING QUICKLY
THERE'S A PAIN INITIATIVE ON
MECHANISMS IN PAIN RESEARCH.
A CLINICAL TRIAL READINESS
INITIATIVE WE TALKED ABOUT IN
COUNCIL BEFORE.
THE RE-ISSUE OF THE R35 PROGRAM
WE TALKED ABOUT AT COUNCIL AND
REMAINS ESSENTIALLY UNCHANGED.
THERE'S AN EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM
WE'VE BEEN DOING ON
TRANSLATIONAL DEVICES GOING VERY
WELL.
THE LAST TWO INITIATIVES ARE
THROUGH THE COUNTER ACT PROGRAM
AND ALSO IF I RECALL HAS ITS OWN
NIH FUNDING STREAM.
NUMBER 5 IS A REISSUE AND THE
LAST IS THE ONLY NEW INITIATIVE
ON THE SLIDE-ISSUE AND THE
LAST IS THE ONLY NEW INITIATIVE
ON THE SLIDE COUNTER MEASURES
AGAINST CHEMICAL THREAT BUT IF
ANYBODY WANTS TO HEAR MORE
THAT'S FINE AND WE HAVE PROGRAM
DIRECTORS WHO CAN TALK ABOUT
THEM.
OKAY, HEARING NO, GOING ONCE,
TWICE, THREE.
SO NOW WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS
COMBINE ALL THE INITIATIVES,
MOSTLY RE-ISSUES ON THIS SLIDE
BIG THE LIST OF ALZHEIMER'S
INITIATIVES THAT ROD JUST
MENTIONED AND WE DO FORMALLY
NEED CONCEPT CLEARANCE FOR ALL
OF THESE TO CONTINUE MOVING
FORWARD.
AGAIN, WALTER ULTIMATELY HAS TO
SIGN OFF ON ALL SUCH INITIATIVES
EVEN AFTER THEY GET CONCEPT
CLEARANCE FROM COUNCIL.
IF YOU COULD TAKE THIS SLIDE OFF
THE SCREEN, ANDREW.
WHAT WE NEED TO CONCLUDE THIS
EXCITING DAY IS A MOTION WITH
RESPECT TO THE 10 OR 20
INITIATIVES I JUST MENTIONED.
>> YOU MOVE TO APPROVE THE
CONCEPTS GO FORWARD.
I SAW MANY THUMBS UP AND
SECONDS.
OKAY.
SO KELLY MAKE SURE THE CHAT IS
THE MISCELLANEOUS LIST AND THE
ADRD INITIATIVES.
WELL, IT'S A LITTLE AFTER 5:30
AND WE ARE DONE.
>> WE HAVE A QUICK UPDATE FROM
NINA.
>> HAPPY TO DO SO.
I CAN KEEP THIS VERY BRIEF.
WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF RESEARCH
FOR OUR NEXT SCIENTIFIC
DIRECTOR.
WE HAVE AN ABSOLUTELY TERRIFIC
COMMITTEE AND THANKS TO THOSE OF
YOU WHO HAVE HELPED WITH THAT
EFFORT.
WE COLLECTIVELY REACHED OUT TO
SOMETHING LIKE 95 INDIVIDUALS
DIRECTLY WHETHER BY E-MAIL OR
TELEPHONE OR BUMPING INTO THEM
IN THE ZOOM ROOM.
WE GOT A TOTAL OF 21 COMPLETED
APPLICATIONS BY THE DEADLINE
DATE.
THE APPLICANT POOL WAS 24%
WOMEN, 5% BLACK, 10% HISPANIC
AND 24% ASIAN.
AND WE ALSO THERE'S RUMORS GOING
AROUND IT EITHER HAD TO BE A
CLINICIAN OR COULDN'T BE A
CLINICIAN.
I WANT TO PUT THAT TO REST AT
OUR FACULTY MEETING.
IT TURNS OUT THE APPLICANTS ARE
ABOUT 50% Ph.D.s, ABOUT 15% OR
SO M.D.s AND JUST SHY OF 30% MD
Ph.D AND HAD ONE DVM APPLY.
I THINK DIVERSITY REALLY WAS
QUITE ROBUST IN THOSE TO WHO WE
REACHED OUT AND ENDED UP
APPLYING FOR THE POSITION.
WE ARE IN THE MIDST OF
INTERVIEWING SEMI FINALISTS FOR
THE POSITION AND ANTICIPATE BY
THE END OF FEBRUARY WE'LL HAVE
FINALIST TO HAND OFF TO WALTER.
I MADE A CONSCIOUS EFFORT TO
KEEP THE P.I.s AND WE CAN'T TELL
THE NAMES OF ANYBODY APPLIED OR
NOT APPLIED OR WHAT HAVE YOU.
I TRIED TO KEEP THEM IN THE LOOP
SO THEY FEEL IT'S A TRANSPARENT
PROCESS.
>> IS YOUR SEARCH COMMITTEE MADE
UP FROM PEOPLE ACROSS NIH?
>> IT INCLUDES PEOPLE FROM
INSIDE AND OUTSIDE OF NIH.
ONLY NIH PEOPLE ARE COMPLICITLY
VOTING MEMBERS IF WE PUT
SOMETHING TO A VOTE BUT
EVERYBODY EN IT -- ENTERS INTO
THE DISCUSSION.
>> THANKS A LOT.
ANY LAST WORDS, WALTER?
>> NO, THAT WAS GREAT.
WE WENT THROUGH A LOT TODAY.
>> TOMORROW ON THE CLOSED
SESSION I THINK WILL BE PRETTY
SHORT, WE NEVER KNOW, AT THE END
OF THE CLOSED SESSION MOST STAFF
WILL LEAVE THE ZOOM CALL BECAUSE
WE'LL DO A QUICK REVIEW OF THE
CLINICAL DIRECTOR IN INTRAMURAL.
SO THAT WILL BE IN THE CLOSED
SESSION TOMORROW SO DON'T LEAVE
WHEN WE CONCLUDE THE SPECIALS
LIST.
THANKS ANYBODY AND UNLESS
THERE'S OTHER QUESTIONS WE'LL
SEE YOU TOMORROW AT 1:00.
>> THANKS, EVERYONE.