National Cancer Institute's Cancer Disparities Research Partnership Program: Experience and Lessons Learned.

PURPOSE: To increase access of underserved/health disparities communities to National Cancer Institute (NCI) clinical trials, the Radiation Research Program piloted a unique model - the Cancer Disparities Research Partnership (CDRP) program. CDRP targeted community hospitals with a limited past NCI funding history and provided funding to establish the infrastructure for their clinical research program. METHODS: Initially, 5-year planning phase funding was awarded to six CDRP institutions through a cooperative agreement (U56). Five were subsequently eligible to compete for 5-year implementation phase (U54) funding and three received a second award. Additionally, the NCI Center to Reduce Cancer Health Disparities supported their U56 patient navigation programs. RESULTS: Community-based hospitals with little or no clinical trials experience required at least a year to develop the infrastructure and establish community outreach/education and patient navigation programs before accrual to clinical trials could begin. Once established, CDRP sites increased their yearly patient accrual mainly to NCI-sponsored cooperative group trials (~60%) and Principal Investigator/mentor-initiated trials (~30%). The total number of patients accrued on all types of trials was 2,371, while 5,147 patients received navigation services. CONCLUSION: Despite a historical gap in participation in clinical cancer research, underserved communities are willing/eager to participate. Since a limited number of cooperative group trials address locally advanced diseases seen in health disparities populations; this shortcoming needs to be rectified. Sustainability for these programs remains a challenge. Addressing these gaps through research and public health mechanisms may have an important impact on their health, scientific progress, and efforts to increase diversity in NCI clinical trials.

Normal tissue protection for improving radiotherapy: Where are the Gaps?

Any tumor could be controlled by radiation therapy if sufficient dose were delivered to all tumor cells. Although technological advances in physical treatment delivery have been developed to allow more radiation dose conformity, normal tissues are invariably included in any radiation field within the tumor volume and also as part of the exit and entrance doses relevant for particle therapy. Mechanisms of normal tissue injury and related biomarkers are now being investigated, facilitating the discovery and development of a next generation of radiation protectors and mitigators. Bringing recent research advances stimulated by development of radiation countermeasures for mass casualties, to clinical cancer care requires understanding the impact of protectors and mitigators on tumor response. These may include treatments that modify cellular damage and death processes, inflammation, alteration of normal flora, wound healing, tissue regeneration and others, specifically to counter cancer site-specific adverse effects to improve outcome of radiation therapy. Such advances in knowledge of tissue and organ biology, mechanisms of injury, development of predictive biomarkers and mechanisms of radioprotection have re-energized the field of normal tissue protection and mitigation. Since various factors, including organ sensitivity to radiation, cellular turnover rate, and differences in mechanisms of injury manifestation and damage response vary among tissues, successful development of radioprotectors/mitigators/treatments may require multiple approaches to address cancer site specific needs. In this review, we discuss examples of important adverse effects of radiotherapy (acute and intermediate to late occurring, when it is delivered either alone or in conjunction with chemotherapy, and important limitations in the current approaches of using radioprotectors and/or mitigators for improving radiation therapy. Also, we are providing general concepts for drug development for improving radiation therapy.

National cancer institute perspectives.

The National Cancer Institute (NCI) Perspectives this year presented information on the systemic targeted radionuclide therapy (STaRT) research projects: (1) being investigated at the NCI's Intramural Center for Cancer Research; (2) funded by NCI's Radiation Research Program and other extramural programs; and (3) the appropriate National Institutes of Health/NCI funding mechanisms applicable to researchers for obtaining funds for STaRT projects.

Education and training for radiation scientists: radiation research program and American Society of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology Workshop, Bethesda, Maryland, May 12-14, 2003.

Current and potential shortfalls in the number of radiation scientists stand in sharp contrast to the emerging scientific opportunities and the need for new knowledge to address issues of cancer survivorship and radiological and nuclear terrorism. In response to these challenges, workshops organized by the Radiation Research Program (RRP), National Cancer Institute (NCI) (Radiat. Res. 157, 204-223, 2002; Radiat. Res. 159, 812-834, 2003), and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) (Nature, 421, 787, 2003) have engaged experts from a range of federal agencies, academia and industry. This workshop, Education and Training for Radiation Scientists, addressed the need to establish a sustainable pool of expertise and talent for a wide range of activities and careers related to radiation biology, oncology and epidemiology. Although fundamental radiation chemistry and physics are also critical to radiation sciences, this workshop did not address workforce needs in these areas. The recommendations include: (1) Establish a National Council of Radiation Sciences to develop a strategy for increasing the number of radiation scientists. The strategy includes NIH training grants, interagency cooperation, interinstitutional collaboration among universities, and active involvement of all stakeholders. (2) Create new and expanded training programs with sustained funding. These may take the form of regional Centers of Excellence for Radiation Sciences. (3) Continue and broaden educational efforts of the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ASTRO), the American Association for Cancer Research (AACR), the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA), and the Radiation Research Society (RRS). (4) Foster education and training in the radiation sciences for the range of career opportunities including radiation oncology, radiation biology, radiation epidemiology, radiation safety, health/government policy, and industrial research. (5) Educate other scientists and the general public on the quantitative, basic, molecular, translational and applied aspects of radiation sciences.

Molecular and cellular biology of moderate-dose (1-10 Gy) radiation and potential mechanisms of radiation protection: report of a workshop at Bethesda, Maryland, December 17-18, 2001.

Exposures to doses of radiation of 1-10 Gy, defined in this workshop as moderate-dose radiation, may occur during the course of radiation therapy or as the result of radiation accidents or nuclear/radiological terrorism alone or in conjunction with bioterrorism. The resulting radiation injuries would be due to a series of molecular, cellular, tissue and whole-animal processes. To address the status of research on these issues, a broad-based workshop was convened. The specific recommendations were: (1) RESEARCH: Identify the key molecular, cellular and tissue pathways that lead from the initial molecular lesions to immediate and delayed injury. The latter is a chronic progressive process for which postexposure treatment may be possible. (2) Technology: Develop high-throughput technology for studying gene, protein and other biochemical expression after radiation exposure, and cytogenetic markers of radiation exposure employing rapid and accurate techniques for analyzing multiple samples. (3) Treatment strategies: Identify additional biological targets and develop effective treatments for radiation injury. (4) Ensuring sufficient expertise: Recruit and train investigators from such fields as radiation biology, cancer biology, molecular biology, cellular biology and wound healing, and encourage collaboration on interdisciplinary research on the mechanisms and treatment of radiation injury. Communicate knowledge of the effects of radiation exposure to the general public and to investigators, policy makers and agencies involved in response to nuclear accidents/events and protection/treatment of the general public.