and Human Services (HHS)
EXPIRED
Department of Health and Human Services
Participating Organizations
National Institutes of Health, (http://www.nih.gov)
Components of Participating Organizations
National Cancer Institute, (http://www.nci.nih.gov)
Title: Memory T Lymphocytes in Cancer Immunology (R01)
Announcement Type
New
Update: The following update relating to this announcement has been issued:
Program Announcement (PA) Number: PA-06-350
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number(s)
93.396
Key Dates
Release Date: April 13, 2006
Letters of Intent
Receipt Date(s): Not
applicable.
Application Submission Date(s): Standard dates
apply, please see http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/funding/submissionschedule.htm for
details.Peer
Review Date(s): Standard
dates apply, please see http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/funding/submissionschedule.htm for
details.
Council Review
Date(s): Standard
dates apply, please see http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/funding/submissionschedule.htm for
details.
Earliest
Anticipated Start Date(s): Standard dates apply, please see http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/funding/submissionschedule.htm for
details.
Additional Information To Be Available Date (URL Activation Date): Not applicable.
Expiration Date for R01 Non-AIDS Applications: November 2, 2006
Expiration Date for R01 AIDS and AIDS-Related Applications: January 3, 2007
Due Dates for E.O. 12372
Not applicable.
Additional
Overview Content
Executive Summary
Table of Contents
Part
I Overview Information
Part
II Full Text of Announcement
Section
I. Funding Opportunity Description
1. Research Objectives
Section
II. Award Information
1. Mechanism(s) of Support
2. Funds Available
Section
III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants
A. Eligible Institutions
B. Eligible Individuals
2.Cost Sharing or Matching
3. Other - Special Eligibility Criteria
Section
IV. Application and Submission Information
1. Address to Request Application
Information
2. Content and Form of Application
Submission
3. Submission Dates and Times
A. Submission, Review and
Anticipated Start Dates
1. Letter of
Intent
B. Sending an Application to
the NIH
C. Application Processing
4. Intergovernmental Review
5. Funding Restrictions
6. Other Submission Requirements
Section
V. Application Review Information
1. Criteria
2. Review and Selection Process
A. Additional Review Criteria
B. Additional Review
Considerations
C. Sharing Research Data
D. Sharing Research Resources
3. Anticipated Announcement and Award
Dates
Section
VI. Award Administration Information
1. Award Notices
2. Administrative and National Policy
Requirements
3. Reporting
Section
VII. Agency Contact(s)
1. Scientific/Research Contact(s)
2. Peer Review Contact(s)
3. Financial/ Grants Management Contact(s)
Section
VIII. Other Information - Required Federal Citations
Part II
- Full Text of Announcement
Section I. Funding Opportunity Description
1. Research Objectives
Purpose.
This Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) is intended to advance the area of anti-tumor immunity by promoting basic research studies that are focused on memory T lymphocytes, and the cells and molecules with which they interact. The overarching objective is to ultimately improve the prospects for the development and application of vaccines and immunotherapies that can be used to successfully prevent and treat cancers in humans.
Understanding and exploiting the induction of long-lasting antigen-specific T lymphocyte immunity to human tumors is one of the major challenges faced by cancer immunology research. Long-lasting T cell immunity to any antigen requires both an initial primary response to generate specific effector T cells, and the subsequent generation of memory T cells that stay quiescent for a long time but are capable of re-activation upon host re-encounter with the antigen. Memory T cells, like effector T cells, belong to a heterogeneous class of lymphocytes. Memory T cells are defined based on phenotypic and/or functional criteria, although specific definitions vary among different investigators. The relationship between effector and memory T cells is not yet fully understood. The generation of effector cells is a necessary step, but is not sufficient for the induction of long-lasting anti-tumor immunity. Also important are the emergence of memory T cells, their maintenance, and their re-activation upon the re-exposure to antigen. The requirements for steps involving memory T cells may differ from those for the induction of primary effector T cell responses. Given the potential anti-tumor effects, a deeper understanding of the biological processes underlying effective immune memory responses is needed and is worthy of detailed exploration.
There is the particular need to know more about tumor antigens that are capable of initiating memory cell responses, and about the mechanisms that drive T cells into the memory cell differentiation pathway, while overcoming growth inhibitory signals present in the tumor microenvironment. The roles of the cytokines and growth factors in these processes need to be elucidated. It is important to understand how memory cells are maintained in a quiescent state and how they resume proliferation after long dormancy. Such re-activation may be a critical step in response to the re-emergence of tumor growth from residual disease depots.
Recent advances and successes in cancer immunotherapy research and practice are in significant part a derivative of increasing multidisciplinary knowledge and novel technological capabilities at the interface of tumor immunology, biology, and genetics. The progress to date justifies continued and intensified research efforts to understand the fundamental properties of the immune system and to apply that understanding to elicit desirable tumor-directed immune responses. Recognizing the need and timeliness to stimulate research on cancer immunology related to memory T cell generation and their subsequent responses, the National Cancer Institute announces two parallel FOAs of identical overall objectives and scientific scope.
Who should consider this FOA?
Background and Overall Objectives
Antigen presentation to T cells for induction of effective memory immune responses.
Over the last several years, biochemical and genetic screening systems have allowed identification and characterization of candidate antigens and epitopes for a number of tumor types (e.g., melanoma and renal cell carcinoma). These epitopes have been predominantly MHC Class I-restricted and recognized by CD8+ T cells. The identification and characterization of MHC Class II-restricted epitopes recognized by CD4+ T cells has lagged behind, due to greater technical requirements of the antigen-screening strategies for these epitopes. Potential sources of candidate tumor antigens are expanding. Accordingly, efforts are needed to identify antigens derived not only from the dominant clonal tumor cells, but also from tumor stem cells. Another potential source of target antigens is the constellation of non-transformed tumor stromal cells, since these cells may be required for tumor survival and growth. Studies designed to investigate the generation, maintenance, and function of T cell responses to these types of authentic tumor antigens, rather than to highly immunogenic model antigens, are therefore very timely and will be necessary to address such critical issues as T cell tolerance to authentic tumor antigens and the potential repertoire of T cells that can recognize authentic tumor antigens.
Because many (or most) authentic tumor antigens are self-antigens, T cell responses to such tumor antigens may be impaired by previous exposure to the antigens in the host. The requirements for developing and optimizing protocols for effective antigen presentation to T cells for memory cell generation may therefore be unique for anti-tumor responses. In addition, recent findings suggest that antigen presentation requirements may be different for effector T cell and memory T cell generation. Studies designed to investigate tumor antigen presentation will necessarily build on what is known for presentation of non-self antigens, but must also address the unique challenges of mounting an effective memory T cell response to these self antigens.
The success or failure of strategies aimed at generating persistent memory T cell responses to authentic tumor antigens is likely to depend on three key strategic choices: (1) the selection of the antigen presenting cell (APC) type, (2) antigen source/form, and (3) the handling of APCs (including approaches to loading APCs with antigen) to optimize their immunogenicity.
1. Type of APC. Hemopoietic dendritic cells (DCs) are now recognized as the most potent class of APC and, therefore, are most likely to be used as APCs. However, DCs are a heterogeneous cell category, with distinct maturation stages and differentiated subsets. Therefore, for reproducible immunotherapy protocols, it needs to be clarified which DC sub-types are effective under various tumor antigen immunization conditions.
2. Antigen
source/form. Available
strategic options are diverse and include: (a) an isolated antigenic peptide; (b)
full-length antigenic protein; (c) cDNA encoding an antigenic protein; (d) cDNA
encoding a fusion protein (containing both an antigenic peptide and additional
epitopes to augment the immune response); (e) mRNA for an antigenic protein; (f)
tumor cell lysates; or (g) killed tumor cells. Each of these strategies has
been used in immunotherapy protocol models and each has its advantages and
disadvantages. Further investigations need to define which of these strategies
would be optimal for inducing memory T cell responses.
3. APC handling. Approaches and procedures to activating the APCs need also to be optimized for memory T cell generation. APCs can be isolated from the host, loaded with tumor antigen in vitro, and then re-administered into the host (adoptive cell transfer). Alternatively, the APCs can be loaded in vivo by injecting the antigen into the host. The in vitro option may provide more flexibility with respect to additional manipulations of the APCs, such as adjuvant treatment to enhance activation and increase their immunogenicity. Conversely, the in vivo option may lead to superior DC trafficking and homing to the relevant lymphoid tissues for initiation of the T cell activation process and memory T cell generation.
Studies of the expanding array of inhibitory signals that affect T cell activation in vivo are also warranted. Some of these signals originate outside of the immune system, such as those from tumor cells or other cells in the tumor microenvironment. Other inhibitory effects arise from the activities of subsets of immune cells, such as CD25+ regulatory T cells or immature DCs. Responding T cells also generate normal intrinsic inhibitory signals, such as those initiated by CTLA-4. Blockade of inhibitory cells and/or signals can be combined with either active anti-tumor immunization or adoptive transfer of in vitro-generated anti-tumor T cells. Impressive results from such combination therapies have been observed in the clinic and in animals. The relationship of these therapeutic successes to successful memory T cell generation may be a key for the design of future cancer immunotherapies.
Generation of tumor-directed T cell memory in vitro for adoptive T cell transfer. Recent successes in the use of in vitro activation followed by in vivo re-infusion of tumor-specific T cells for the treatment of melanoma in humans and in animal models raise the possibility that this strategy may be explored for other tumor types as well. Various parameters requiring optimization for memory T cell generation in vitro correspond directly to those required for active immunization of anti-tumor memory T cell responses in vivo. However, the flexibility in manipulations of T cells in vitro may facilitate generating optimal anti-tumor immunity (including long-lasting memory T cells) that would not be possible with purely in vivo immunization strategies. Memory T cell generation, either in vitro before re-infusion or in vivo in the patient after re-infusion, could ultimately lead to improved immunotherapy. It remains to be determined which of these two strategies would be more efficacious.
Decisions regarding tumor antigen and DC preparation for in vitro T cell activation protocols may be influenced by whether the selected T cell populations to be stimulated and expanded in vitro have previously encountered the target antigen in vivo, and by the nature and outcome of that encounter. The possibility that the most relevant antigen-specific T cells have been deleted, anergized, and/or otherwise incapacitated by normal self-tolerance and/or tumor-induced immunosuppression in vivo will also directly impinge on the in vitro activation strategy. This latter scenario is one in which in vitro activation of T cells may provide opportunities not available with in vivo immunization strategies. For example, flexibility in the source of T cells (e.g., blood, lymph node(s), or tumor-infiltrating cells) to be used for the in vitro activation regimen may facilitate collection and/or enrichment of T cells with desirable activation or re-activation capacities. Purification of T cells for in vitro stimulation would also remove tumor cells from the activation environment. This eliminates the adverse possibility of re-creating of the patient’s own ineffective in vivo anti-tumor T cell priming process. Instead, in the absence of tumor cells, the immune response may be skewed toward desirable memory T cell generation. After the primed T cells of the effector and/or memory sub-types are generated, they are suitable for adaptive cell transfer. However after their re-administration to patients, additional interventions are needed to promote the continued survival and function of the memory cells in vivo. Possible strategies that should be investigated include such cytokine supplementation, periodic boosting with an appropriate antigen-expressing APC population, and elimination or dampening of regulatory cell populations.
Scope of Specific Objectives
The over-arching goal of research applications in response to this FOA should be closing the gaps, outlined in the preceding section, in our existing knowledge of memory T cell function in antitumor immunity. The expected outcomes should be relevant to, and ultimately useful for, improving cancer immunotherapy. Studies on the general properties of immune cells and responses, not clearly directed at cancer immunology, will be considered non-responsive to this FOA.
The proposed research may include investigations of T memory cell differentiation, maintenance, and re-activation. Investigations may entail both human and animal studies, and both in vitro and in vivo models. Innovative uses of existing technologies and reagents, as well as the development of new technologies and reagents, are encouraged.
The following topical areas are of high interest, but other relevant innovative projects are also encouraged.
See Section VIII, Other Information - Required Federal Citations for policies related to this announcement.
1. Mechanism(s) of Support
This funding opportunity
will use the NIH investigator-initiated research project grants (R01) award
mechanism.
As an applicant, you
will be solely responsible for planning, directing, and executing the proposed
project.
This funding opportunity
uses just-in-time concepts. It also uses the modular as well as the non-modular
budget formats (see http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/modular/modular.htm).
Specifically, if you are submitting an application with direct costs in each
year of $250,000 or less, use the modular budget format described in the PHS
398 application instructions. Otherwise follow the instructions for non-modular
research grant applications.
2. Funds Available
No set-aside funds are
available for this funding opportunity. Applicants may request up to 5 years of
support for R01 awards with costs appropriately tailored to the proposed work.
No limit is set on the costs requested by R01 applicants. Because the nature and scope
of the proposed research will vary from application to application, it is
anticipated that the size and duration of each award will also vary. Although
the financial plans of the IC(s) provide support for this program, awards
pursuant to this funding opportunity are contingent upon the availability of
funds and the receipt of a sufficient number of meritorious applications.
Section
III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants
1.A. Eligible Institutions
You may submit (an)
application(s) if your organization has any of the following characteristics:
1.B.
Eligible Individuals
Any
individual with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry out the
proposed research is invited to work with their institution to develop an
application for support. Individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic
groups as well as individuals with disabilities are always encouraged to apply
for NIH programs.
2. Cost Sharing or Matching
This program
does not require cost sharing.
The most current Grants
Policy Statement can be found at: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/nihgps_Part2.htm#matching_or_cost_sharing
3. Other-Special Eligibility Criteria
Not applicable.
Section
IV. Application and Submission Information
1. Address to Request Application Information
The PHS 398 application
instructions are available at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/phs398.html in an interactive format. Applicants must use the currently approved version of
the PHS 398. For further assistance contact GrantsInfo, Telephone (301) 710-0267, Email: [email protected].
Telecommunications for
the hearing impaired: TTY 301-451-5936.
2. Content and Form of Application Submission
Applications must be
prepared using the most current PHS 398 research grant application instructions
and forms. Applications must have a D&B Data Universal Numbering System
(DUNS) number as the universal identifier when applying for Federal grants or
cooperative agreements. The D&B number can be obtained by calling (866) 705-57 11 or through the web site at http://www.dnb.com/us/.
The D&B number should be entered on line 11 of the face page of the PHS 398
form.
The title and number of this funding opportunity must
be typed on line 2 of the face page of the application form and the YES box
must be checked.
Foreign Organizations
Several special provisions apply to applications
submitted by foreign organizations:
Proposed research should provide special opportunities for furthering research programs through the use of unusual talent, resources, populations, or environmental conditions in other countries that are not readily available in the United States or that augment existing U.S. resources.
3. Submission Dates and Times
See Section IV.3.A for
details.
3.A.
Submission, Review and Anticipated Start Dates
Letter of Intent Receipt Date(s):
Not applicable
Application Submission Date(s): http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/submissionschedule.htm
Peer Review Date(s): http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/submissionschedule.htm
Council Review Date(s): http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/submissionschedule.htm
Earliest Anticipated Start Date(s): http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/submissionschedule.htm
3.A.1. Letter of
Intent
A
letter of intent is not required for the funding opportunity.
3.B. Sending an
Application to the NIH
Applications must be
prepared using the research grant application forms found in the PHS 398 instructions
for preparing a research grant application. Submit a signed, typewritten
original of the application, including the checklist, and five signed
photocopies in one package to:
Center for Scientific
Review
National Institutes of Health
6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 1040, MSC 7710
Bethesda, MD 20892-7710 (U.S. Postal Service Express
or regular mail)
Bethesda, MD 20817 (for express/courier service;
non-USPS service)
Personal deliveries of
applications are no longer permitted (see http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-03-040.html).
3.C.
Application Processing
Applications must be submitted on or before the application
receipt/submission dates described above (Section
IV.3.A.) and at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/dates.htm.
Upon receipt applications
will be evaluated for completeness by CSR. Incomplete applications will not be
reviewed.
The NIH will not accept
any application in response to this funding opportunity that is essentially the
same as one currently pending initial merit review unless the applicant
withdraws the pending application. The NIH will not accept any application that
is essentially the same as one already reviewed. This does not preclude the
submission of a substantial revision of an application already reviewed, but
such application must include an Introduction addressing the previous critique.
Information on the status of an
application should be checked by the Principal Investigator in the eRA Commons
at: https://commons.era.nih.gov/commons/.
4. Intergovernmental Review
This initiative is not
subject to intergovernmental
review.
5. Funding Restrictions
All NIH awards are
subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations
described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement. The Grants Policy Statement can
be found at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/policy.htm.
Pre-Award Costs are
allowable. A grantee may, at its own risk and without NIH prior approval, incur
obligations and expenditures to cover costs up to 90 days before the beginning
date of the initial budget period of a new or competing continuation award if
such costs: are necessary to conduct the project, and would be allowable under
the grant, if awarded, without NIH prior approval. If specific expenditures
would otherwise require prior approval, the grantee must obtain NIH approval
before incurring the cost. NIH prior approval is required for any costs to be
incurred more than 90 days before the beginning date of the initial budget
period of a new or competing continuation award.
The incurrence of pre-award costs in anticipation of a
competing or non-competing award imposes no obligation on NIH either to make
the award or to increase the amount of the approved budget if an award is made
for less than the amount anticipated and is inadequate to cover the pre-award
costs incurred. NIH expects the grantee to be fully aware that pre-award costs
result in borrowing against future support and that such borrowing must not
impair the grantee's ability to accomplish the project objectives in the
approved time frame or in any way adversely affect the conduct of the project.
See NIH Grants Policy Statement http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/NIHGPS_Part6.htm.
6. Other Submission Requirements
Specific
Instructions for Modular Grant applications.
Applications requesting up to $250,000 per year in direct costs must be submitted in a modular budget format. The modular budget format simplifies the preparation of the budget in these applications by limiting the level of budgetary detail. Applicants request direct costs in $25,000 modules. Section C of the research grant application instructions for the PHS 398 at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/phs398.html includes step-by-step guidance for preparing modular budgets. Applicants must use the currently approved version of the PHS 398. Additional information on modular budgets is available at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/modular/modular.htm.
Specific Instructions for Applications Requesting $500,000 (direct costs) or More per Year
Applicants
requesting $500,000 or more in direct costs for any year must carry out the
following steps:
1) Contact the IC
program staff at least 6 weeks before submitting the application, i.e., as you
are developing plans for the study;
2) Obtain agreement
from the IC staff that the IC will accept your application for consideration
for award; and,
3) Include a cover letter with the application that
identifies the staff member and IC who agreed to accept assignment of the
application.
This policy
applies to all investigator-initiated new (type 1), competing continuation
(type 2), competing supplement, or any amended or revised version of these
grant application types. Additional information on this policy is available in
the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts, October 19, 2001 at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-02-004.html.
Plan for Sharing Research
Data
The precise content of
the data-sharing plan will vary, depending on the data being collected and how the
investigator is planning to share the data. Applicants who are planning to
share data may wish to describe briefly the expected schedule for data sharing,
the format of the final dataset, the documentation to be provided, whether or
not any analytic tools also will be provided, whether or not a data-sharing
agreement will be required and, if so, a brief description of such an agreement
(including the criteria for deciding who can receive the data and whether or
not any conditions will be placed on their use), and the mode of data sharing
(e.g., under their own auspices by mailing a disk or posting data on their
institutional or personal website, through a data archive or enclave).
Investigators choosing to share under their own auspices may wish to enter into
a data-sharing agreement. References to data sharing may also be appropriate in
other sections of the application.
Applicants requesting
more than $500,000 in direct costs in any year of the proposed research must
include a plan for sharing research data in their application. The funding
organization will be responsible for monitoring the data sharing policy (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/data_sharing).
The reasonableness of the data sharing plan or the
rationale for not sharing research data may be assessed by the reviewers.
However, reviewers will not factor the proposed data sharing plan into the
determination of scientific merit or the priority score.
Sharing Research Resources
NIH policy requires that
grant awardee recipients make unique research resources readily available for
research purposes to qualified individuals within the scientific community
after publication (NIH Grants Policy Statement http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/index.htm and http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/NIHGPS_Part7.htm#_Toc54600131).
Investigators responding to this funding opportunity should include a plan for
sharing research resources addressing how unique research resources will be
shared or explain why sharing is not possible.
The adequacy of the resources sharing plan and any
related data sharing plans will be considered by Program staff of the funding
organization when making recommendations about funding applications. The
effectiveness of the resource sharing will be evaluated as part of the administrative
review of each non-competing Grant Progress Report (PHS 2590, http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/2590/2590.htm).
See Section
VI.3. Reporting.
Section V. Application Review Information
1. Criteria
Only the review criteria
described below will be considered in the review process.
2. Review and Selection Process
Applications
submitted for this funding opportunity will be assigned to the ICs on the basis
of established PHS referral guidelines.
Appropriate scientific review groups convened in
accordance with the standard NIH peer review procedures (http://www.csr.nih.gov/refrev.htm)
will evaluate applications for scientific and technical merit.
The following will be considered in making funding decisions:
As part of the initial merit review, all applications will:
The
goals of NIH supported research are to advance our understanding of biological
systems, to improve the control of disease, and to enhance health. In their
written critiques, reviewers will be asked to comment on each of the following
criteria in order to judge the likelihood that the proposed research will have
a substantial impact on the pursuit of these goals. Each of these criteria will
be addressed and considered in assigning the overall score, weighting them as
appropriate for each application. Note that an application does not need to be
strong in all categories to be judged likely to have major scientific impact
and thus deserve a high priority score. For example, an investigator may
propose to carry out important work that by its nature is not innovative but is
essential to move a field forward.
Significance: Does this study address an
important problem? If the aims of the application are achieved, how will
scientific knowledge or clinical practice be advanced? What will be the effect
of these studies on the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services,
or preventative interventions that drive this field?
Approach: Are the conceptual or
clinical framework, design, methods, and analyses adequately developed, well
integrated, well reasoned, and appropriate to the aims of the project? Does the
applicant acknowledge potential problem areas and consider alternative tactics?
Innovation: Is the project original and
innovative? For example: Does the project challenge existing paradigms or
clinical practice; address an innovative hypothesis or critical barrier to
progress in the field? Does the project develop or employ novel concepts,
approaches, methodologies, tools, or technologies for this area?
Investigators: Are the investigators
appropriately trained and well suited to carry out this work? Is the work
proposed appropriate to the experience level of the principal investigator and
other researchers? Does the investigative team bring complementary and
integrated expertise to the project (if applicable)?
Environment: Does the scientific
environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of
success? Do the proposed studies benefit from unique features of the scientific
environment, or subject populations, or employ useful collaborative
arrangements? Is there evidence of institutional support?
2.A. Additional Review
Criteria:
In addition to the above
criteria, the following items will continue to be considered in the
determination of scientific merit and the priority score:
Protection
of Human Subjects from Research Risk: The involvement of human subjects and protections from
research risk relating to their participation in the proposed research will be
assessed (see the Research Plan, Section E on Human Subjects in the PHS Form
398).
Inclusion
of Women, Minorities and Children in Research: The adequacy of plans to
include subjects from both genders, all racial and ethnic groups (and
subgroups), and children as appropriate for the scientific goals of the
research will be assessed. Plans for the recruitment and retention of subjects
will also be evaluated (see the Research Plan, Section E on Human Subjects in
the PHS Form 398).
Care and
Use of Vertebrate Animals in Research: If vertebrate animals are to
be used in the project, the five items described under Section F of the PHS
Form 398 research grant application instructions will be assessed.
Biohazards: If materials or procedures
are proposed that are potentially hazardous to research personnel and/or the
environment, determine if the proposed protection is adequate.
2.B. Additional Review
Considerations
Budget: The reasonableness of the
proposed budget and the requested period of support in relation to the proposed
research. The priority score should not be affected by the evaluation of the
budget.
2.C. Sharing Research Data
Data Sharing Plan: The reasonableness of the
data sharing plan or the rationale for not sharing research data may be
assessed by the reviewers. However, reviewers will not factor the proposed data
sharing plan into the determination of scientific merit or the priority score.
The funding organization will be responsible for monitoring the data sharing
policy. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/data_sharing. Program staff will be responsible for the administrative
review of the plan for sharing research data.
2.D. Sharing Research
Resources
NIH policy requires that
grant awardee recipients make unique research resources readily available for
research purposes to qualified individuals within the scientific community
after publication (See the NIH Grants Policy Statement http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps/part_ii_5.htm#availofrr and http://ott.od.nih.gov/policy/rt_guide_final.html). Investigators responding to
this funding opportunity should include a sharing research resources plan
addressing how unique research resources will be shared or explain why sharing
is not possible. Program staff will be responsible for the administrative review of the
plan for sharing research resources.
The adequacy of the
resources sharing plan will be considered by Program staff of the funding
organization when making recommendations about funding applications. Program
staff may negotiate modifications of the data and resource sharing plans with
the awardee before recommending funding of an application. The final version of
the data and resource sharing plans negotiated by both will become a condition
of the award of the grant. The effectiveness of the resource sharing will be
evaluated as part of the administrative review of each non-competing Grant
Progress Report (PHS 2590). See Section
VI.3. Reporting.
3. Anticipated Announcement and Award Dates
Not applicable.
Section
VI. Award Administration Information
1. Award Notices
After the peer review of
the application is completed, the PD/PI will be able to access his or her
Summary Statement (written critique) via the eRA Commons.
If the application is under consideration for funding,
NIH will request "just-in-time" information from the applicant. For
details, applicants may refer to the NIH Grants Policy Statement Part II: Terms
and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart A: General (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/NIHGPS_part4.htm).
A formal notification in the form of a Notice
of Award (NoA) will be provided to the applicant organization. The NoA
signed by the grants management officer is the authorizing document. Once all
administrative and programmatic issues have been resolved, the NoA will be
generated via email notification from the awarding component to the grantee
business official (designated in item 12 on the Application Face Page). If a
grantee is not email enabled, a hard copy of the NoA will be mailed to the
business official.
Selection of an application for award is not an
authorization to begin performance. Any costs incurred before receipt of the NoA
are at the recipient's risk. These costs may be reimbursed only to the extent
considered allowable pre-award costs. See Also Section
IV.5. Funding Restrictions.
2. Administrative and National
Policy Requirements
All NIH grant and
cooperative agreement awards include the NIH Grants Policy Statement as part of
the NoA. For these terms of award, see the NIH Grants Policy Statement Part II:
Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart A: General (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/NIHGPS_Part4.htm)
and Part II Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart B: Terms and
Conditions for Specific Types of Grants, Grantees, and Activities (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/NIHGPS_part9.htm).
3. Reporting
Awardees will be
required to submit the PHS Non-Competing Grant Progress Report, Form 2590
annually (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/2590/2590.htm)
and financial statements as required in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
Section
VII. Agency Contacts
We
encourage your inquiries concerning this funding opportunity and welcome the
opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants. Inquiries may fall
into three areas: scientific/research, peer review, and financial or grants
management issues:
1. Scientific/Research Contacts:
Susan A. McCarthy, Ph.D.
Division of
Cancer Biology
National
Cancer Institute
EPN, Room 5058
6130 Executive Blvd.
Bethesda, MD 20892-7380 (for U.S. Postal
Service express or regular delivery)
Rockville, MD 20852 (for express/courier
delivery)
Telephone: (301) 496-7815
FAX: 301-480-2844
Email: [email protected]
2. Peer Review Contacts:
Not applicable.
3. Financial or Grants Management Contacts:
Leslie N. Hickman
Grants
Administration Branch
National
Cancer Institute
6120
Executive Boulevard, EPS Room 243. MSC 7148
Bethesda, MD 20892-7148 (for U.S. Postal
Service express or regular delivery)
Rockville, MD 20852 (for express/courier
delivery)
Telephone:
(301) 496-3177
FAX:
(301) 846-5720
Email: [email protected]
Section VIII. Other Information
Required Federal Citations
Use of Animals in
Research:
Recipients of PHS
support for activities involving live, vertebrate animals must comply with PHS
Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/references/PHSPolicyLabAnimals.pdf)
as mandated by the Health Research Extension Act of 1985 (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/references/hrea1985.htm),
and the USDA Animal Welfare Regulations (http://www.nal.usda.gov/awic/legislat/usdaleg1.htm)
as applicable.
Human Subjects
Protection:
Federal regulations
(45CFR46) require that applications and proposals involving human subjects must
be evaluated with reference to the risks to the subjects, the adequacy of
protection against these risks, the potential benefits of the research to the
subjects and others, and the importance of the knowledge gained or to be gained
(http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/45cfr46.htm).
Data and Safety
Monitoring Plan:
Data and safety
monitoring is required for all types of clinical trials, including physiologic
toxicity and dose-finding studies (phase I); efficacy studies (Phase II);
efficacy, effectiveness and comparative trials (Phase III). Monitoring should
be commensurate with risk. The establishment of data and safety monitoring
boards (DSMBs) is required for multi-site clinical trials involving
interventions that entail potential risks to the participants (NIH Policy for Data
and Safety Monitoring, NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts, http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/not98-084.html).
Sharing Research
Data:
Investigators submitting
an NIH application seeking $500,000 or more in direct costs in any single year
are expected to include a plan for data sharing or state why this is not
possible (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/data_sharing).
Investigators should seek guidance from their
institutions, on issues related to institutional policies and local IRB rules,
as well as local, State and Federal laws and regulations, including the Privacy
Rule. Reviewers will consider the data sharing plan but will not factor the
plan into the determination of the scientific merit or the priority score.
Access to Research
Data through the Freedom of Information Act:
The Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) Circular A-110 has been revised to provide access to research
data through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) under some circumstances.
Data that are (1) first produced in a project that is supported in whole or in
part with Federal funds and (2) cited publicly and officially by a Federal
agency in support of an action that has the force and effect of law (i.e., a
regulation) may be accessed through FOIA. It is important for applicants to
understand the basic scope of this amendment. NIH has provided guidance at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/a110/a110_guidance_dec1999.htm.
Applicants may wish to place data collected under this funding opportunity in a
public archive, which can provide protections for the data and manage the
distribution for an indefinite period of time. If so, the application should
include a description of the archiving plan in the study design and include
information about this in the budget justification section of the application.
In addition, applicants should think about how to structure informed consent
statements and other human subjects procedures given the potential for wider
use of data collected under this award.
Sharing of Model
Organisms:
NIH is committed to
support efforts that encourage sharing of important research resources
including the sharing of model organisms for biomedical research (see http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/model_organism/index.htm).
At the same time the NIH recognizes the rights of grantees and contractors to
elect and retain title to subject inventions developed with Federal funding
pursuant to the Bayh Dole Act (see the NIH Grants Policy Statement http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/index.htm).
All investigators submitting an NIH application or contract proposal, beginning
with the October 1, 2004 receipt date, are expected to include in the
application/proposal a description of a specific plan for sharing and
distributing unique model organism research resources generated using NIH
funding or state why such sharing is restricted or not possible. This will
permit other researchers to benefit from the resources developed with public
funding. The inclusion of a model organism sharing plan is not subject to a
cost threshold in any year and is expected to be included in all applications
where the development of model organisms is anticipated.
Inclusion of Women
And Minorities in Clinical Research:
It is the policy of the
NIH that women and members of minority groups and their sub-populations must be
included in all NIH-supported clinical research projects unless a clear and compelling
justification is provided indicating that inclusion is inappropriate with
respect to the health of the subjects or the purpose of the research. This
policy results from the NIH Revitalization Act of 1993 (Section 492B of Public
Law 103-43). All investigators proposing clinical research should read the
"NIH Guidelines for Inclusion of Women and Minorities as Subjects in
Clinical Research (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-02-001.html);
a complete copy of the updated Guidelines is available at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/women_min/guidelines_amended_10_2001.htm.
The amended policy incorporates: the use of an NIH definition of clinical
research; updated racial and ethnic categories in compliance with the new OMB
standards; clarification of language governing NIH-defined Phase III clinical
trials consistent with the new PHS Form 398; and updated roles and
responsibilities of NIH staff and the extramural community. The policy
continues to require for all NIH-defined Phase III clinical trials that: a) all
applications or proposals and/or protocols must provide a description of plans
to conduct analyses, as appropriate, to address differences by sex/gender
and/or racial/ethnic groups, including subgroups if applicable; and b)
investigators must report annual accrual and progress in conducting analyses,
as appropriate, by sex/gender and/or racial/ethnic group differences.
Inclusion of Children
as Participants in Clinical Research:
The NIH maintains a
policy that children (i.e., individuals under the age of 21) must be included
in all clinical research, conducted or supported by the NIH, unless there are
scientific and ethical reasons not to include them.
All investigators proposing research involving human
subjects should read the "NIH Policy and Guidelines" on the inclusion
of children as participants in research involving human subjects (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/children/children.htm).
Required Education on
the Protection of Human Subject Participants:
NIH policy requires
education on the protection of human subject participants for all investigators
submitting NIH applications for research involving human subjects and
individuals designated as key personnel. The policy is available at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-00-039.html.
Human Embryonic Stem
Cells (hESC):
Criteria for federal
funding of research on hESCs can be found at http://stemcells.nih.gov/index.asp and at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-02-005.html.
Only research using hESC lines that are registered in the NIH Human Embryonic
Stem Cell Registry will be eligible for Federal funding (http://escr.nih.gov/). It is the responsibility
of the applicant to provide in the project description and elsewhere in the
application as appropriate, the official NIH identifier(s) for the hESC
line(s)to be used in the proposed research. Applications that do not provide
this information will be returned without review.
NIH Public Access
Policy:
NIH-funded investigators
are requested to submit to the NIH manuscript submission (NIHMS) system (http://www.nihms.nih.gov/) at PubMed
Central (PMC) an electronic version of the author's final manuscript upon
acceptance for publication, resulting from research supported in whole or in
part with direct costs from NIH. The author's final manuscript is defined as
the final version accepted for journal publication, and includes all
modifications from the publishing peer review process.
NIH is requesting that
authors submit manuscripts resulting from 1) currently funded NIH research
projects or 2) previously supported NIH research projects if they are accepted
for publication on or after May 2, 2005. The NIH Public Access Policy applies
to all research grant and career development award mechanisms, cooperative
agreements, contracts, Institutional and Individual Ruth L. Kirschstein
National Research Service Awards, as well as NIH intramural research studies.
The Policy applies to peer-reviewed, original research publications that have
been supported in whole or in part with direct costs from NIH, but it does not
apply to book chapters, editorials, reviews, or conference proceedings.
Publications resulting from non-NIH-supported research projects should not be
submitted.
For more information
about the Policy or the submission process please visit the NIH Public Access
Policy Web site at http://publicaccess.nih.gov/ and
view the Policy or other Resources and Tools including the Authors' Manual (http://publicaccess.nih.gov/publicaccess_Manual.htm).
Standards for Privacy
of Individually Identifiable Health Information:
The Department of Health
and Human Services (DHHS) issued final modification to the "Standards for
Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information", the
"Privacy Rule", on August 14, 2002 . The Privacy Rule is a federal
regulation under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act
(HIPAA) of 1996 that governs the protection of individually identifiable health
information, and is administered and enforced by the DHHS Office for Civil
Rights (OCR).
Decisions about applicability and implementation of
the Privacy Rule reside with the researcher and his/her institution. The OCR
website (http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/)
provides information on the Privacy Rule, including a complete Regulation Text and
a set of decision tools on "Am I a covered entity?" Information on
the impact of the HIPAA Privacy Rule on NIH processes involving the review,
funding, and progress monitoring of grants, cooperative agreements, and
research contracts can be found at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-03-025.html.
URLs in NIH Grant Applications or Appendices:
All applications and
proposals for NIH funding must be self-contained within specified page
limitations. Unless otherwise specified in an NIH solicitation, Internet
addresses (URLs) should not be used to provide information necessary to the
review because reviewers are under no obligation to view the Internet sites.
Furthermore, we caution reviewers that their anonymity may be compromised when
they directly access an Internet site.
Healthy People 2010:
The Public Health
Service (PHS) is committed to achieving the health promotion and disease
prevention objectives of "Healthy People 2010," a PHS-led national
activity for setting priority areas. This PA is related to one or more of the
priority areas. Potential applicants may obtain a copy of "Healthy People
2010" at http://www.health.gov/healthypeople.
Authority and
Regulations: This program is described in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
at http://www.cfda.gov/ and is not subject
to the intergovernmental review requirements of Executive Order 12372 or Health
Systems Agency review. Awards are made under the authorization of Sections 301
and 405 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241 and 284) and
under Federal Regulations 42 CFR 52 and 45 CFR Parts 74 and 92. All awards are
subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations
described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement. The NIH Grants Policy
Statement can be found at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/policy.htm.
The PHS strongly
encourages all grant recipients to provide a smoke-free workplace and
discourage the use of all tobacco products. In addition, Public Law 103-227,
the Pro-Children Act of 1994, prohibits smoking in certain facilities (or in
some cases, any portion of a facility) in which regular or routine education,
library, day care, health care, or early childhood development services are
provided to children. This is consistent with the PHS mission to protect and
advance the physical and mental health of the American people.
Loan Repayment
Programs:
NIH encourages
applications for educational loan repayment from qualified health professionals
who have made a commitment to pursue a research career involving clinical,
pediatric, contraception, infertility, and health disparities related areas.
The LRP is an important component of NIH's efforts to recruit and retain the
next generation of researchers by providing the means for developing a research
career unfettered by the burden of student loan debt. Note that an NIH grant is
not required for eligibility and concurrent career award and LRP applications
are encouraged. The periods of career award and LRP award may overlap providing
the LRP recipient with the required commitment of time and effort, as LRP
awardees must commit at least 50% of their time (at least 20 hours per week
based on a 40 hour week) for two years to the research. For further
information, please see: http://www.lrp.nih.gov/.
Weekly TOC for this Announcement
NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices
|
| ||||||
|
|
|
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) |
|
|||
|
NIH... Turning Discovery Into Health® |
||||||