Changes in the National Cancer Institute's R01 workforce: growth, aging, retention, and policy implications.

Scientific progress and discovery of preventions and cures for life-threatening diseases depend on the vitality of the biomedical research workforce. We analyzed the workforce of cancer researchers applying for and receiving R01 awards from the National Cancer Institute (NCI) from fiscal years 1990 to 2016, the last year prior to implementation of the Next Generation Researchers Initiative. Here we report that the NCI R01 Principal Investigator (PI) workforce expanded 1.4-fold and aged over this time frame. We tracked 9 age groups and found that the number of PIs in the 3 oldest groups increased dramatically, in contrast with the younger groups. Sustained increases in the number of funded older PIs stemmed from increases in the number of older PIs submitting applications, rather than higher funding rates for older PIs. The decline in the number of funded younger PIs was driven in part by (a) a marked increase in time from PhD degree to first R01 application and award, as well as (b) a decrease in retention of PIs in the funded R01 workforce beyond their first R01 award. The NCI is using these and other analyses to inform strategies and policies for attracting, supporting, and retaining meritorious early-career researchers.

Toward Independence: Resubmission Rate of Unfunded National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute R01 Research Grant Applications Among Early Stage Investigators.

PURPOSE: The current, budget-driven low rate of National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding for biomedical research has raised concerns about new investigators' ability to become independent scientists and their willingness to persist in efforts to secure funding. The authors sought to determine resubmission rates for unfunded National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) early stage investigator (ESI) independent research grant (R01) applications and to identify resubmission predictors. METHOD: The authors used a retrospective cohort study design and retrieved applications submitted in fiscal years 2010-2012 from NIH electronic research administrative sources. They defined ESI applicants as those who have received no prior R01 (or equivalent) funding and are within 10 years of completion of their terminal research degree or medical residency training. ESI applications at the NHLBI were eligible for special funding consideration if they scored above, but within 10 points of, the payline. The primary outcome was application resubmission after failing to secure funding with the first R01 submission. RESULTS: Over half of the unfunded applications were resubmitted. Some of these were discussed and "percentiled." Among percentiled applications, the only significant predictor of resubmission was the percentile score. Over half (59%) of the ESI R01 grants funded by NHLBI in fiscal years 2010-2012 had percentile scores above but within 10 points of the NHLBI payline, and benefited from the special funding considerations. CONCLUSIONS: The only independent predictor of resubmission of NHLBI ESI R01 grant applications was percentile score; applicant demographics and institutional factors were not predictive of resubmission.

Discovery pharmaceutics--challenges and opportunities.

Most pharmaceutical companies are now evaluating compounds for druglike properties early in the discovery process. The data generated at these early stages allow upfront identification of potential development challenges and thus selection of the best candidates for lead nomination. Most often, lead nomination candidates are selected based on pharmacological and toxicological data. However, many drugs in development suffer from poor biopharmaceutical properties due to suboptimal physiochemical parameters. The poor biopharmaceutical properties often lead to extended timelines and a higher cost of developing the compounds. To avoid these problems and choose the best compounds from a biopharmaceutical perspective, physicochemical parameters such as solubility, lipophilicity, and stability need to be evaluated as early as possible. Furthermore, the preformulation approaches used to evaluate the compounds for their pharmacokinetic and toxicological properties need to be optimized. This minireview summarizes some of the parameters and approaches that can be used to evaluate compounds in the early stages of drug discovery.