The Cancer Letter

The leading source for information on the issues that shape oncology since 1973

White House

Federal judge blocks Trump administration’s move to limit indirect costs to 15% for NIH-funded institutions

The move could gut academic cancer research

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on email
Share on print
BYLINE
IN THIS ISSUE
BYLINEDOWNLOAD PDFTABLE OF CONTENTS

Updated Feb. 13, 7:09 PM

A federal judge in Massachusetts on Feb. 10, issued a preliminary restraining order, blocking the Trump administration from enforcing an NIH guidance that would cut the indirect costs paid on NIH grants to a flat rate of 15%.

To access this subscriber-only content please log in or subscribe.

If your institution has a site license, log in with IP-login or register for a sponsored account.*
*Not all site licenses are enrolled in sponsored accounts.

Login Subscribe
Byline
Paul Goldberg
Editor & Publisher
Table of Contents

YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN

PodcastThe Directors

The Directors: Directors of two Midwestern cancer centers tell us about the challenging healthcare economics in rural areas
“Institutions are feeling crunched in so many different directions”

How’s this for a paradox: The better cancer centers become at keeping patients alive, the more expensive cancer care becomes. This brutal tradeoff hits harder in rural areas, where the cancer burden is higher and the investigator and clinical trial representation is lower.
By Paul Goldberg and Claire Marie Porter
Funding Opportunities

The Foundation for AIDS Research opens RFP to fund non-HIV cancer research

Historically, the research initiatives of the Foundation for AIDS Research (amfAR) have focused on finding a cure for HIV. Four decades of HIV research have reshaped our understanding of the immune system, and insights from HIV have been leveraged in adjacent fields, including cancer immunology. Innovation can be bi-directional and reciprocal. Seminal findings in cancer immunology have also furthered understanding of HIV biology. 

Proposed OMB rule aims at the heart of the U.S. research enterprise—and scientists are fighting back
“The question isn’t whether politics will influence research. Under this proposal, that’s the point. That’s their goal.”

The White House Office of Management and Budget has published a “Regulation for Federal Financial Assistance,” a proposed rule that seeks to fundamentally redraw the ground rules for all federally funded research. On the other side are America’s scientists who aren’t just crying foul—they are readying for a political fight.
By Jacquelyn Cobb
Byline
Paul Goldberg
Editor & Publisher
Table of Contents

Never miss an issue!

Get alerts for our award-winning coverage in your inbox.

Login

Site license subscribers:
Log in with your IP | Register a sponsored account