by KYW's Steve Tawa
Some leading area cancer experts believe the National Cancer Institute should think more "outside the box" in awarding research grants, because that might be the best way to find groundbreaking discoveries.
Sen. Arlen Specter (above), who has fought Hodgkin's disease -- a cancer of the lymphatic system --, heard testimony on Monday before a Senate subcommittee over whether innovative ideas and projects have struggled to receive funding.
Dr. Michael Seiden, CEO of the Fox Chase Cancer Center (in file photo at right), says the current peer-review process for funding has blind spots:
"The process tends to support the status quo, encourages a systematic cautiousness that has the unintended consequences of discarding the highest risk, most innovative, and in some cases what might ultimately prove to be the most promising research proposals."
Dr. Eileen Jaffe, a senior scientist at Fox Chase Cancer Center, testified that when she stumbled upon results that went against textbook explanations, her grant proposal was rejected.
And Dr. Richard Pestell, director of the Kimmel Cancer Center at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, believes it warrants further analysis:
"Cancer is understandable, it's treatable, and it's beatable."
Sen. Specter wrote a book on his experience with cancer, titled Never Give In.
The National Cancer Institute, which funds most research in the US, awards grants to only one in ten applications. A growing number of scientists and researchers believe that number should be closer to 30 percent, to improve the odds for find discoveries to treat and cure cancer.
E-Mail Story
Print Story
