A congressional letter is asking NIH to describe the procedures employed for rooting out sexual misconduct committed by advisors.
The letter, dated Aug. 9 and addressed to NIH Director Francis Collins, also asks for an explanation of policies used in investigating sexual harassment complaints from whistleblowers.
The letter is based on The Cancer Letter’s investigative story of the case of Axel Grothey, an oncologist who was able to retain an influential advisory position at NCI even after being disciplined by three states for inappropriate sexual behavior that involved a mentee (The Cancer Letter, May 28, 2021). In the Grothey case, two women reported Grothey’s misdeeds to NIH and NCI, with no results. The NIH Office of Extramural Research sent an automated response to one of the women and never followed up.
“It is unclear why the NIH cannot provide confidentiality to such whistleblowers but is able to maintain confidentiality of other personnel or intellectual property information,” the congressional letter states. “We … want to ensure that the NIH is holding its committee leaders to the highest standards of conduct and to promote a safe work environment for junior researchers, particularly those in mentor relationships that are vulnerable to abuse of authority.”
The letter is signed by Reps. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) Republican leader on the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, and H. Morgan Griffith (R-VA), ranking member of the House E&C Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.
Reportage by The Cancer Letter prompted NCI Director Ned Sharpless to remove Grothey, a prominent oncologist, from the NCI National Clinical Trials Network’s Gastrointestinal Steering Committee, which he co-chaired. More than 10 cancer organizations and institutions have censured or barred Grothey (The Cancer Letter, June 4, 2021).
Democrats are absent from the congressional letter. NIH is also facing bipartisan pressure to formulate rules on sexual harassment for institutions receiving NIH funds through grants or cooperative agreements (The Cancer Letter, July 23, 2021). A disclosure provision, contained in the FY2022 House appropriations committee bill, would give NIH the authority to “issue regulations” that would delineate reporting requirements for institutions.
The Grothey case came to light only because a medical licensure board in Minnesota got involved. State licensure boards and hospital credentialing bodies play no role in cases that involve basic scientists and other non-clinical faculty, in effect allowing perpetrators to escape public scrutiny. The House committee bill would apply to clinicians and non-clinicians alike.
NIH officials, including Collins, have said that NIH is unable to require reporting of sexual misconduct by outside entities.
In a May 26 hearing before the Senate appropriations subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies, Collins said NIH has asked institutions to report harassment and sexual misconduct, but lacked authority to require such reporting.
“I wish we were able to simply require—at the present time, legally, we are told we don’t have that authority,” Collins said to Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA), chair of the Senate appropriations subcommittee. “We would have to go through a two-year rulemaking effort, or we would need statutory assistance.”
In a House appropriations committee report that accompanies the appropriations bill for next year, lawmakers used unusually strong language to allege inaction on the part of NIH’s leaders:
“The Committee is deeply frustrated by NIH’s failure to implement its direction to address harassment in extramural research settings,” House appropriators wrote on page 151 of the bill report (The Cancer Letter, July 23, 2021).
The provision represents a cultural shift toward striving for gender equity in academic medicine and is in line with a renewed commitment in government and academia to address racial injustice and health disparities.
NIH does not comment on pending legislation. Responding to questions about the House provision on harassment, NIH officials said “necessary steps” were taken when they were informed of Grothey’s misconduct.
The text of the congressional letter on the Grothey case follows:
Dear Dr. Collins,
We write to you about our concerns over the National Institutes of Health (NIH)’s questionable handling of sexual harassment complaints about an oncologist who served in leadership roles on NIH committees.
The Cancer Letter recently reported that Dr. Axel Grothey, a prominent gastrointestinal oncologist, was reprimanded in 2020 by medical licensure boards in three states for engaging in unethical sexual relationships with two female colleagues, both in mentorship relationships with Dr. Grothey, when he was employed at Mayo Clinic Rochester (“Mayo”), his long-time employer.1 Despite these three reprimands that were publicly available in 2020, Dr. Grothey held his prominent appointment as co-chair of the NIH National Cancer Institute (NCI) National Clinical Trials Network’s Gastrointestinal Steering Committee, an influential group that reviews ideas for clinical trials and helps determine the priorities in federally funded clinical research in GI oncology.2
In his NIH role, Dr. Grothey’s decisions could have adversely impacted the careers of his accusers.3 Post-graduate medical education follows an apprenticeship model and experienced medical professionals in a supervisory role have tremendous sway over the future of mentees.4 Rates of sexual harassment, assault, and retaliation in the medical education field far outpace other professional disciplines, according to a 2019 study by the National Academy of Sciences.5
It was not until after The Cancer Letter informed NCI officials about Dr. Grothey’s disciplinary record and requested comment that NCI Director Ned Sharpless removed him from the steering committee effective May 27, 2021.6
We note that in 2019 two female scientists from Mayo contacted the NCI and the NIH Office of Extramural Research with allegations about Dr. Grothey’s sexual and ethical misconduct out of concern about Dr. Grothey’s impact on them from Dr. Grothey’s position to wield power on a federal level. On April 3, 2019, one of the two female victims from Mayo emailed complaint information to NCI about Dr. Grothey.7 The email stated in part:
My purpose for contacting you is that you were suggested to me as perhaps the best person to go with a concern shared by myself and several other women, on whose behalf I am writing. On a high level, we were victims of ongoing harassment and assault and career retaliation by an individual who holds multiple leadership roles associated with NCI, including currently chairing an NCI steering committee and with an active or recent committee leadership role with Alliance. Even though our own experiences were reported to our institution at the time (as well as Alliance leadership), which ultimately resulted in his dismissal from that institution, we are aware that he continues to hold these NCI-affiliated titles and is now seeking a new leadership role in another cooperative group.8
A senior NCI official responded to the female scientist, essentially saying the NCI could not do anything, and then referred her to Dr. Collins’ letter of February 2019 and several complaint pathways, including the Office of Extramural Research for awardees complaining of sexual harassment.
Subsequently, on May 6, 2019, another female scientist from Mayo wrote with a complaint about Dr. Grothey to the email address dedicated to reporting sexual harassment complaints operated by the NIH Office of Extramural Research.9 The victim only received an NIH Office of Extramural Research automated response without any follow-up contact to her.
On its Anti-Sexual Harassment Policy for NIH Awardee Organizations website, NIH claims that it “cannot take personnel or legal actions for non-NIH employees.” NIH also does not guarantee confidentiality for individuals who submit reports those who report someone.10 It is unclear why the NIH cannot provide confidentiality to such whistleblowers but is able to maintain confidentiality of other personnel or intellectual property information.
As noted by Dr. Karyn Goodman, the remaining co-chair of the NCI National Clinical Trials Network’s GI Steering Committee, “As leaders in academic medicine, we need to promote a safe environment for our junior faculty and hold people accountable for their transgressions.” Dr. Goodman also said, “The NCI, in particular, should be the paragon of virtue when it comes to equity issues and set the standard high for the rest of academic medicine to follow.”
We agree and want to ensure that the NIH is holding its committee leaders to the highest standards of conduct and to promote a safe work environment for junior researchers, particularly those in mentor relationships that are vulnerable to abuse of authority.
In light of our concerns, please respond to the following by August 30, 2021:
- What was the NCI’s and the NIH’s policy and process in 2019 for handling sexual harassment complaints about individuals outside of NCI/NIH serving in leadership roles on NCI/NIH committees? Was the approach uniform across all of NIH or was it institute/center-specific?
- What is the NCI’s and the NIH’s policy and process currently for handling sexual harassment complaints about individuals outside of NCI/NIH serving in leadership roles on NCI/NIH committees? Is the approach uniform across all of NIH or is it institute/center-specific?
- If there is no policy and process in this area, what actions, if any, will be taken to establish policy and processes for such complaints?
- What obligations do professionals have immediately to report to NIH any complaints and reprimands involving sexual harassment or unethical conduct for those who hold NIH leadership roles such as steering committees?
- Do you agree with the removal action that Dr. Sharpless took on May 27, 2021?
If you have any questions, please contact Alan Slobodin or Diane Cutler of the Minority Committee staff. Thank you for your attention to this request.
Sincerely,
Cathy McMorris Rodgers
Republican Leader
Committee on Energy and Commerce
H. Morgan Griffith
Ranking Member
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations
CC: The Honorable Frank Pallone, Chairman
The Honorable Diana DeGette, Chair, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations
1Alexandria Carolan and Paul Goldberg, Prominent GI oncologist Axel Grothey was forced out of Mayo Clinic for unethical sexual relationships with women he mentored, The Cancer Letter (May 28, 2021), available at https://cancerletter.com/the-cancer-letter/20210528_1/.
2 Id.
3 Nick Mucahy, Mayo Clinic Top Doc Ousted Over Sexual Relations With Mentees, Medscape (June 4, 2021) available at https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/952249.
4 Margaret Cronin Fisk, America’s Medical Profession Has a Sexual Harassment Problem, Bloomberg (Apr. 30, 2019) available at https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2019-04-30/america-s-medical-profession-has-a- sexual-harassment-problem.
5 Margaret Cronin Fisk, America’s Medical Profession Has a Sexual Harassment Problem, Bloomberg (Apr. 30, 2019) available at https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2019-04-30/america-s-medical-profession-has-a- sexual-harassment-problem.
6 Id.
7 Id.
8 Id.
9 National Institutes of Health Grants & Funding, Find Help, Anti-Sexual Harassment Policy, (last updated Feb. 28, 2019) available at https://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/harassment/find-help.htm.
10 National Institutes of Health Grants & Funding, What to Expect When Notifying NIH, Anti-Sexual Harassment Policy, (last updated Feb. 28,2019) available at https://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/harassment/notify.htm.
