EXPIRED
National Institutes of Health (NIH)
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
UG1 Clinical Research Cooperative Agreements - Single Project
See Section III. 3. Additional Information on Eligibility.
Through this Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO), the National Cancer Institute (NCI) proposes and will support the Cancer Prevention Clinical Trials Network (CP-CTNet) sites, for which the goals are as follows:
CP-CTNet consists of two types of components:
The CP-CTNet Sites will provide scientific leadership in development and conduct of early phase cancer prevention clinical trials as well as in the management and analysis of the data.
August 23, 2024
Application Due Dates | Review and Award Cycles | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
New | Renewal / Resubmission / Revision (as allowed) | AIDS - New/Renewal/Resubmission/Revision, as allowed | Scientific Merit Review | Advisory Council Review | Earliest Start Date |
October 31, 2024 | October 31, 2024 | Not Applicable | March 2025 | May 2025 | July 2025 |
All applications are due by 5:00 PM local time of applicant organization.
Applicants are encouraged to apply early to allow adequate time to make any corrections to errors found in the application during the submission process by the due date.
No late applications will be accepted for this Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO).
Not Applicable
It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the Research (R) Instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide, except where instructed to do otherwise (in this NOFO or in a Notice from NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts).
Conformance to all requirements (both in the How to Apply - Application Guide and the NOFO) is required and strictly enforced. Applicants must read and follow all application instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide as well as any program-specific instructions noted in Section IV. When the program-specific instructions deviate from those in the How to Apply - Application Guide, follow the program-specific instructions.
Applications that do not comply with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.
There are several options available to submit your application through Grants.gov to NIH and Department of Health and Human Services partners. You must use one of these submission options to access the application forms for this opportunity.
The purpose of the National Cancer Institute (NCI)-supported Cancer Prevention Clinical Trials Network (CP-CTNet) is to perform early phase clinical trials to evaluate the biologic effects of preventive agents and interventions and to determine clinically-relevant correlates in order to advance their development for cancer prevention.
CP-CTNet will support the following two types of components that will be individually awarded through two Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) announcements indicated below:
Each CP-CTNet Site will consist of a Lead Academic Organization (LAO) and Affiliated Organizations (AOs) that will work together to perform clinical trials. Each CP-CTNet LAO will serve as the research hub for its group and will be the UG1 applicant institution. Each LAO will constitute a multi-institutional clinical trial group and provide the infrastructure to develop, implement, and analyze the studies. The Clinical trials will be performed either by the LAO and/or AOs within each CP-CTNet site or across the CP-CTNet sites (cross-network trials).
Key Definitions for the context of this NOFO:
Note: It is essential that applicants for this NOFO are also fully familiar with the companion NOFO, RFA-CA-24-025, including the specific goals and other vital details of the DMASC's functions within the CP-CTNet.
The search for effective cancer preventive agents, in the context of a rapidly advancing molecular understanding of the process of carcinogenesis, has led to the study of an increasing number of agents that intervene in specific molecular pathways thought to be critical to cancer development. The rapidly advancing, albeit incomplete, understanding of the early phases of cancer development provides a strong rationale for increased investment in cancer prevention. There has been a longstanding interest in infectious etiologies of cancer and highly effective preventive vaccines (human papillomavirus, hepatitis B) or treatments (hepatitis C) are now integrated into standard care. Targeting these obligatory causes of cancer has profound consequences on public health. For instance, in the case of human papillomavirus, an effective country-wide vaccination program in the UK led to a highly significant population-level decrease in cervical cancer, as high as 97% when vaccinations were given at age 12-13 years. More recently, the recognition of the importance of the role of the immune system in tumor development and the recent successes in cancer immunotherapy for the treatment of advanced malignancies have led to a resurgence of interest in immunopreventive approaches aimed at cancers not associated with infections. The increasing number and molecularly or immunologically targeted nature of new agents require an efficient clinical trials system for evaluation and screening prior to moving to larger definitive phase III trials. These complex trials must also include extensive biomarker analyses, investigation of the biologic effects of the agent on the intended target, and correlation with clinically relevant indicators of potential health outcomes.
The nature of cancer prevention clinical trials requires access to specialized high-risk populations who obtain their care from different subspecialists and expertise in tissue collection and biomarker analysis. A typical phase II trial might examine the effect of an intervention on a histologically-proven premalignancy in participants at risk for cancer. This requires the screening of multiple high-risk individuals with invasive procedures, such as a colonoscopy or bronchoscopy, to identify those who harbor such premalignancies, followed by post-treatment procedures with biopsies to assess the interventions efficacy. Other types of studies employed in cancer preventive agent development include (but are not limited to): phase 0 micro-dosing trials, phase I pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic trials, and window-of-opportunity trials performed prior to definitive cancer treatment. Individuals participating in such studies include healthy volunteers, individuals at high risk for cancer either due to genetic predisposition or the presence of premalignant lesions, and cancer patients either prior to or after definitive treatment of the primary malignancy. Thus, multi-institutional groups of clinicians from diverse specialties, research nurses, pathologists, translational scientists, statisticians, data managers, and other personnel with expertise in cancer prevention, drug development, and biomarker analysis are needed to successfully perform increasingly complex cancer prevention clinical trials.
NCI supports the systematic development of cancer preventive agents through three major programmatic initiatives managed by the Division of Cancer Prevention (DCP):
This NOFO and RFA-CA-24-025 will fund the continuation of CP-CTNet. Each CP-CTNet Site will perform a variety of early phase cancer prevention trials in appropriately high-risk populations, ranging from phase 0 to phase IIb trials. Agents to be studied will include those developed by the pharmaceutical industry and provided to NCI for collaborative development, commercially available agents, agents developed by the grantees, and agents developed by NCI.
The overall goal of CP-CTNet is to perform early phase cancer prevention clinical trials to identify agents and interventions that can advance through the various phases of clinical development. Specific objectives are summarized below:
Goals and Scope of Activities for CP-CTNet Sites
The main role of CP-CTNet Sites will be to design and conduct early phase (phase 0-II) cancer prevention clinical trials.
For this role, each CP-CTNet LAO will be expected to serve as the main research infrastructure to support the performance of clinical trials. The LAOs will provide administrative support and oversight to clinical trial performance across their member AOs, as well as develop and perform specific clinical trials within their own (LAO) institutions. The role of the AOs will be to develop clinical trials in collaboration with the LAOs and to accrue to specific studies. LAOs and AOs may participate in studies arising within their CP-CTNet Site as well as within other CP-CTNet Sites. Studies that are performed across CP-CTNet Sites, with funding provided by different CP-CTNet Sites, are considered cross-network trials and are encouraged.
The LAO will be required to interact closely with the DMASC, which will provide centralized data management, statistical expertise for cross-network trials, auditing, and network-wide administrative support.
Required Capabilities: Each proposed CP-CTNet Site needs to have expertise, skills, and infrastructure for the proper conduct of the following expected scope of activities:
Agents to be Studied: Agents to be developed will be announced quarterly via NCI solicitations for Concept Proposals for clinical trials. Agents may be developed for specific indications by individual CP-CTNet Sites or jointly by more than one Site (for cross-network trials). CP-CTNet Sites are also expected to propose unsolicited concepts using agents or interventions available to their investigators.
Important Note: It is expected that the CP-CTNet Sites supported under this NOFO will have expertise in evaluating multiple types of agents, with emphasis on pharmacologic agents and immunopreventive vaccines and other immune modulators.
Required Functional Components: To realize the stated objectives, the CP-CTNet Site applicants must organize and include the following two required functional components:
CP-CTNet Network Governance and Trans-Network Activities
Steering Committee: The representatives of CP-CTNet awardees (with the participation of the NCI) will be expected to form a Steering Committee as a self-governing body for the Network. For details on the composition and responsibilities of the Steering Committee, see Section VI.2 under Cooperative Agreement Terms and Conditions of the Award.
Trans-Network Research Activities
All CP-CTNet Sites will be expected to work jointly toward the CP-CTNet network goals by:
The following types of activities remain outside the scope of this NOFO, and applications proposing them are non-responsive to this NOFO and will not be reviewed:
NCI/DCP will provide the following additional infrastructure support to CP-CTNet participants:
NCI will support data and specimen access through the Cancer Data Access System (CDAS). This portal will provide access to the CP-CTNet clinical trial data after trial publication and will provide access to request associated residual biospecimens. NCI will provide long-term storage for the collected biospecimens.
See Section VIII. Other Information for award authorities and regulations.
Investigators proposing NIH-defined clinical trials may refer to the Research Methods Resources website for information about developing statistical methods and study designs.
Cooperative Agreement: A financial assistance mechanism used when there will be substantial Federal scientific or programmatic involvement. Substantial involvement means that, after award, NIH scientific or program staff will assist, guide, coordinate, or participate in project activities. See Section VI.2 for additional information about the substantial involvement for this NOFO.
The OER Glossary and the How to Apply - Application Guide provide details on these application types. Only those application types listed here are allowed for this NOFO.
Required: Only accepting applications that propose clinical trial(s).
NCI intends to commit $8,750,000 (total costs) each year for 6 years beginning in FY 2025 to support 5 awards for CP-CTNet Sites
The requested budget must not exceed $1,375,000 in direct costs for each year of the project period.
The project period will be six years.
NIH grants policies as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement will apply to the applications submitted and awards made from this NOFO.
Higher Education Institutions
The following types of Higher Education Institutions are always encouraged to apply for NIH support as Public or Private Institutions of Higher Education:
Nonprofits Other Than Institutions of Higher Education
Federal Governments
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Organizations) are not eligible to apply.
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) components of U.S. Organizations are not eligible to apply.
Foreign components, as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement, are allowed.
Applicant Organizations
Applicant organizations must complete and maintain the following registrations as described in the How to Apply - Application Guide to be eligible to apply for or receive an award. All registrations must be completed prior to the application being submitted. Registration can take 6 weeks or more, so applicants should begin the registration process as soon as possible. Failure to complete registrations in advance of a due date is not a valid reason for a late submission, please reference NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 2.3.9.2 Electronically Submitted Applications for additional information
Program Directors/Principal Investigators (PD(s)/PI(s))
All PD(s)/PI(s) must have an eRA Commons account. PD(s)/PI(s) should work with their organizational officials to either create a new account or to affiliate their existing account with the applicant organization in eRA Commons. If the PD/PI is also the organizational Signing Official, they must have two distinct eRA Commons accounts, one for each role. Obtaining an eRA Commons account can take up to 2 weeks.
Any individual(s) with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry out the proposed research as the Program Director(s)/Principal Investigator(s) (PD(s)/PI(s)) is invited to work with their organization to develop an application for support. Individuals from diverse backgrounds, including underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, individuals with disabilities, and women are always encouraged to apply for NIH support. See, Reminder: Notice of NIH's Encouragement of Applications Supporting Individuals from Underrepresented Ethnic and Racial Groups as well as Individuals with Disabilities, NOT-OD-22-019.
For institutions/organizations proposing multiple PDs/PIs, visit the Multiple Program Director/Principal Investigator Policy and submission details in the Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded) Component of the How to Apply - Application Guide.
The individual designated as PD/PI for the CP-CTNet Site must have his/her primary affiliation at the application-submitting institution (i.e., the LAO). For proposals with Multiple PDs/PIs, the second individual designated as MPI may have a primary affiliation at a different US institution.
These individuals are expected to be nationally and internationally recognized leaders in clinical trials of cancer preventive agents. This expertise should reflect mainly clinical trials of preventive agents (e.g., drugs, small molecules, vaccines/biologics) using measures of drug action and efficacy that include modulation of cancer-related biomarkers.
Additional expertise in other cancer preventive approaches (including medical devices, cancer preventive surgery, risk-reducing surgery, and non-surgical ablative techniques) is also desirable.
The PDs/PIs of applications submitted in response to this NOFO must not be named as Senior/Key Personnel or Other Significant Contributors on the CP-CTNet DMASC award supported under RFA-CA-24-025.
This NOFO does not require cost sharing as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 1.2 Definition of Terms.
Number of Applications
Applicant organizations may submit only one application per institution
Applicant organizations may submit more than one application, provided that each application is scientifically distinct.
The NIH will not accept duplicate or highly overlapping applications under review at the same time, per NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 2.3.7.4 Submission of Resubmission Application. This means that the NIH will not accept:
Only one application per institution is allowed; the institutional resources needed to be a successful LAO and to avoid local competition for resources are too great for any one institution to be able to support more than one LAO.
The application forms package specific to this opportunity must be accessed through ASSIST, Grants.gov Workspace or an institutional system-to-system solution. Links to apply using ASSIST or Grants.gov Workspace are available in Part 1 of this NOFO. See your administrative office for instructions if you plan to use an institutional system-to-system solution.
It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the Research (R) Instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide except where instructed in this notice of funding opportunity to do otherwise. Conformance to the requirements in the How to Apply - Application Guide is required and strictly enforced. Applications that are out of compliance with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.
Although a letter of intent is not required, is not binding, and does not enter into the review of a subsequent application, the information that it contains allows IC staff to estimate the potential review workload and plan the review.
By the date listed in Part 1. Overview Information, prospective applicants are asked to submit a letter of intent that includes the following information:
The letter of intent should be sent to:
Eva Szabo, MD
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
Telephone: 240-276-7011
Fax: 240-276-7848
Email: [email protected]
All page limitations described in the How to Apply – Application Guide and the Table of Page Limits must be followed.
The following section supplements the instructions found in the How to Apply – Application Guide and should be used for preparing an application to this NOFO.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
Facilities & Other Resources:
In addition to the standard items for this attachment, provide the documentation of main capabilities and available resources for CP-CTNet Site. Relevant information may be provided in table form. Provide documentation on the characteristic of the scientific environment in which the cancer clinical trials and other human subjects research will be conducted. Include such aspects as:
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
(Applicants must provide the following additional material specified below. Each attachment should be uploaded as a separate PDF using the indicated filenames (which will serve as application bookmarks).
Attachment 1. Scientific Achievements for Clinical Trials (Use filename: Scientific Achievements): 'Scientific achievements' refers to important information from primary and secondary endpoints of previously performed clinical trials listed in Attachment 3. A table can be used to show such information as the general cancer site category, trial phase, year of publication of study primary outcome or other significant impact, brief title, investigational agent/regimen, description of endpoint or sub-study result, manuscript or abstract reference, and brief description of the importance of endpoint or sub-study result.
For renewal applications, provide overview of major achievements specifically from prior CP-CTNet grant, as well as from other clinical trials if relevant.
Attachment 2: Sample Cancer Prevention Clinical Trial Concepts (Use filename: Sample Concepts): Provide two sample concepts for clinical trials to illustrate the team's approach to preventive agent development. These sample concepts should be realistic and feasible (e.g., the applicants should demonstrate access to agents and target populations proposed.) Although the concepts are primarily to document applicants' proficiency, they may be selected for implementation after grant award.
The two concepts should have the following features:
Attachment 3. Completed and Ongoing Phase 0, I and Phase II Clinical Trials (Use filename: Early Phase Clinical Trials): List phase 0, I and II cancer prevention clinical trials that have been completed during the last 5 years or are ongoing. Trials conducted by or coordinated by the LAO (whether or not the LAO was an accruing site) as well as trials conducted by up to 3 proposed AOs should be included. A table can be used to show the following information: protocol title, trial phase, target organ, when the trial was approved or funded (month/year), when the trial was open (month/year opened - month/year closed), and total planned and achieved participant accrual. Indicate whether the LAO or any proposed AOs participated in each trial. Separately (in a separate table or a separate section in the same table), list up to ten phase I and/or II therapeutic clinical trials that have been completed during the last 5 years and any ongoing clinical trials for which significant research findings are available. The lead institution for each trial should be noted. Note: trials coordinated by the LAO or an AO, for which the LAO or that AO did not accrue participants, should also be listed and the 'coordination only' role should be noted. Additionally, if the LAO and its proposed AOs have participated in at least 5 cancer prevention trials, the inclusion of cancer treatment trials is optional.
For renewal applications: Include all CP-CTNet trials and identify them as CP-CTNet funded.
For new applications: Indicate if any of the included trials were CP-CTNet funded.
Attachment 4. Screening and Accrual Summary by Site for Phase I and Phase II Clinical Trials (Use filename: Trial Screening and Accrual): Provide additional screening and accrual information for the trials listed in Attachment 3. Specifically, indicate the number of participants screened and accrued at the LAO and at each proposed AO that participated in the trial (only provide information on institutions involved in the current grant application). A table can be used to show such information as protocol title, years during which the trial was open, number of participants screened, and number of participants accrued (broken out by individual accruing site).
Attachment 5: Trial Development, Participant Accrual and Trial Reporting for Individual Clinical Trials (Use filename: Trial Timelines): For each trial listed in Attachment 3, list actual timelines for the following specific steps in the clinical trial protocol development process: concept submission to approval (if appropriate), protocol development (from concept approval to final protocol approval, as appropriate), annual accrual rate projected and achieved, total accrual, total number of participants assessed for the primary endpoint, and time from last participant off study to manuscript publication.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
Personnel Costs
Costs of Clinical Trial Performance
The costs of prevention clinical trials are expected to vary depending on their complexity (e.g., short intervention in a healthy cohort versus a longer intervention in a cohort that requires eligibility determination via invasive biopsies). A balanced mix of simple and complex trials and resultant patient care costs should be anticipated. The following types of costs may be requested:
Note: The actual costs of clinical trials performed by the CP-CTNet Site will be determined at the time that studies are proposed and conducted. The proposed complexity and maximum accrual of the studies that are performed will be limited by the funds available at the time the studies are proposed. The use of funds budgeted for participant accrual and endpoint analyses will be restricted until specific clinical trial protocols have received final approval from NCI.
Travel Funds
The LAO PD(s)/PI(s) and at least three representatives from the CP-CTNet LAO and/or AOs will be required to travel to one annual investigator meeting per year in Rockville, MD (see section VI.2).
Patient Advocate and Community Engagement Support
The LAO will be required to engage patient advocates and/or a community engagement board to help with the planning, accrual of minority and underrepresented populations, and oversight of their clinical trials. Support for these activities should be listed in the budget.
Rapid Response Restricted Fund
An amount of $100,000 per year (direct costs) should be entered as "Rapid Response Restricted Fund" under the "Other Expenses" category in the Budget form for years 1-5. This Fund is intended for participant accrual to cross-network trials and/or novel biomarker development and analysis. Specific projects to use this fund will be proposed post-award and will be subject to Steering Committee approval.
The following costs should not be included in the budget:
Budget Justification Additional Instructions:
In addition to the standard items for this attachment, provide a breakdown of the direct costs to show separate amounts for each functional unit (Clinical Trial Program and Site Accrual Program).
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:
Specific Aim: Summarize the overall Specific Aims for the proposed CP-CTNet Site, addressing the development and conduct of early phase cancer prevention clinical trials. Include critical benchmarks for these aims (which should be in line with the requirements outlined in Section I).
Research Strategy: Organize the overall Research Strategy section with sub-sections in the specified order and follow instructions provided below. Start each sub-section with the appropriate sub-section heading.
Sub-Section A: Overview of the Proposed CP-CTNet Site
Note: Supporting documentation for this sub-section is requested under Other Attachments (Attachment 1).
Sub-Section B: Clinical Trial Program
Applicants should describe the proposed management of complex early phase cancer prevention clinical trials, including LOI development, protocol development, participant accrual, clinical trial monitoring, data and specimen management, data analysis and reporting, and compliance with regulatory statutes. The description must address (and be consistent with) the requirements of the NCI DCP Standard Operation Procedures for the conduct of prevention clinical trials.
Scientific and Administrative Leadership
Operational Capacity
Note: Additional documentation (two samples of potential trial concepts) is requested under Other Attachments (Attachment 2). In addressing the bullets above, refer to these sample concepts as appropriate to illustrate specific points.
Trial Endpoint Evaluation
Sub-Section C: Site Accrual Program
Accrual and Study Conduct
Note: Supporting documentation for this sub-section is requested under Other Attachments (Attachments 3-5).
Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans as provided in the How to Apply - Application Guide.
Other Plan(s):
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:
Appendix: Only limited Appendix materials are allowed. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the How to Apply - Application Guide.
When involving human subjects research, clinical research, and/or NIH-defined clinical trials (and when applicable, clinical trials research experience) follow all instructions for the PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form in the How to Apply - Application Guide, with the following additional instructions:
If you answered Yes to the question Are Human Subjects Involved? on the R&R Other Project Information form, you must include at least one human subjects study record using the Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form or Delayed Onset Study record.
Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
Delayed Onset Study
Note: Delayed onset does NOT apply to a study that can be described but will not start immediately (i.e., delayed start). All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
Renewal applications will have ongoing studies that should be updated in the Human Subjects System (HSS). Both renewal and new applications will be designing trials with delayed onset and therefore applicants must add and complete the Delayed Onset Study record and must check the box "Anticipated Clinical Trial?"
Study Title - use: "Multiple Delayed Onset Studies"
Justification Attachment: Indicate that the clinical trials will be designed and conducted by the CP-CTNet Site during the Project Period. Each clinical trial protocol developed will be subject to approval through the standard NCI procedure that involves an initial concept submission and subsequent review. If the concept receives approval, the next stage will be development of the full clinical trial protocol, which will be subject to review and approval by NCI prior to activation through the CP-CTNet. Although all new studies will be delayed onset, human subject protection must be addressed in the appropriate grant section.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
See Part 2. Section III.1 for information regarding the requirement for obtaining a unique entity identifier and for completing and maintaining active registrations in System for Award Management (SAM), NATO Commercial and Government Entity (NCAGE) Code (if applicable), eRA Commons, and Grants.gov
Part I. contains information about Key Dates and times. Applicants are encouraged to submit applications before the due date to ensure they have time to make any application corrections that might be necessary for successful submission. When a submission date falls on a weekend or Federal holiday, the application deadline is automatically extended to the next business day.
Organizations must submit applications to Grants.gov (the online portal to find and apply for grants across all Federal agencies). Applicants must then complete the submission process by tracking the status of the application in the eRA Commons, NIHs electronic system for grants administration. NIH and Grants.gov systems check the application against many of the application instructions upon submission. Errors must be corrected and a changed/corrected application must be submitted to Grants.gov on or before the application due date and time. If a Changed/Corrected application is submitted after the deadline, the application will be considered late. Applications that miss the due date and time are subjected to the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 2.3.9.2 Electronically Submitted Applications.
Applicants are responsible for viewing their application before the due date in the eRA Commons to ensure accurate and successful submission.
Information on the submission process and a definition of on-time submission are provided in the How to Apply – Application Guide.
This initiative is not subject to intergovernmental review.
All NIH awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
Pre-award costs are allowable only as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 7.9.1 Selected Items of Cost.
Applications must be submitted electronically following the instructions described in the How to Apply - Application Guide. Paper applications will not be accepted.
Applicants must complete all required registrations before the application due date. Section III. Eligibility Information contains information about registration.
For assistance with your electronic application or for more information on the electronic submission process, visit How to Apply – Application Guide. If you encounter a system issue beyond your control that threatens your ability to complete the submission process on-time, you must follow the Dealing with System Issues guidance. For assistance with application submission, contact the Application Submission Contacts in Section VII.
Important reminders:
All PD(s)/PI(s) must include their eRA Commons ID in the Credential field of the Senior/Key Person Profile form. Failure to register in the Commons and to include a valid PD/PI Commons ID in the credential field will prevent the successful submission of an electronic application to NIH. See Section III of this NOFO for information on registration requirements.
The applicant organization must ensure that the unique entity identifier provided on the application is the same identifier used in the organizations profile in the eRA Commons and for the System for Award Management. Additional information may be found in the How to Apply - Application Guide.
See more tips for avoiding common errors.
Upon receipt, applications will be evaluated for completeness and compliance with application instructions by the Center for Scientific Review and responsiveness by NCI, NIH. Applications that are incomplete, non-compliant and/or nonresponsive will not be reviewed.
Recipients or subrecipients must submit any information related to violations of federal criminal law involving fraud, bribery, or gratuity violations potentially affecting the federal award. See Mandatory Disclosures, 2 CFR 200.113 and NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 4.1.35.
Send written disclosures to the NIH Chief Grants Management Officer listed on the Notice of Award for the IC that funded the award and to the HHS Office of Inspector Grant Self Disclosure Program at [email protected].
Applicants are required to follow the instructions for post-submission materials, as described in the policy
Only the review criteria described below will be considered in the review process. Applications submitted to the NIH in support of the NIH mission are evaluated for scientific and technical merit through the NIH peer review system.
For this particular announcement, note the following:
The overarching goal of this NOFO is to bring novel prevention interventions into early phase clinical trials. This goal requires investigators with outstanding leadership and a strong record of conducting clinical trials, as well as a robust infrastructure. Particularly important for the clinical development of new generations of investigational cancer preventive interventions is the ability to integrate translational analyses into clinical trials and to perform additional studies, such as PK/PD analyses, and to obtain biomarker data in all participants enrolled on studies.
Essential for CP-CTNet will be the awardees' ability to work as part of a network. In this context, the important aspects are whether the applicants are capable of conducting state-of-the-art early phase prevention trials and biomarker-pilot studies covering a broad range of cancer prevention scenarios (ranging from cancer prevention in healthy individuals, through prevention efforts in high-risk sub-populations, to efforts focused on early stage cancer). Also important is the ability of applicants to work as a coherent research team to efficiently and expeditiously conduct early phase clinical trials.
A proposed Clinical Trial application may include study design, methods, and intervention that are not by themselves innovative but address important questions or unmet needs. Additionally, the results of the clinical trial may indicate that further clinical development of the intervention is unwarranted or lead to new avenues of scientific investigation.
Reviewers will provide an overall impact score to reflect their assessment of the likelihood for the project to exert a sustained, powerful influence on the research field(s) involved, in consideration of the following review criteria and additional review criteria (as applicable for the project proposed).
Reviewers will consider each of the review criteria below in the determination of scientific merit and give a separate score for each. An application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to have major scientific impact. For example, a project that by its nature is not innovative may be essential to advance a field.
Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? Is the prior research that serves as the key support for the proposed project rigorous? If the aims of the project are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice be improved? How will successful completion of the aims change the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field?
Are the scientific rationale and need for a clinical trial to test the proposed hypothesis or intervention well supported by preliminary data, clinical and/or preclinical studies, or information in the literature or knowledge of biological mechanisms? For trials focusing on clinical or public health endpoints, is this clinical trial necessary for testing the safety, efficacy or effectiveness of an intervention that could lead to a change in clinical practice, community behaviors or health care policy? For trials focusing on mechanistic, behavioral, physiological, biochemical, or other biomedical endpoints, is this trial needed to advance scientific understanding?
Are the PD(s)/PI(s), collaborators, and other researchers well suited to the project? If Early Stage Investigators or those in the early stages of independent careers, do they have appropriate experience and training? If established, have they demonstrated an ongoing record of accomplishments that have advanced their field(s)? If the project is collaborative or multi-PD/PI, do the investigators have complementary and integrated expertise; are their leadership approach, governance and organizational structure appropriate for the project?
With regard to the proposed leadership for the project, do the PD/PI(s) and key personnel have the expertise, experience, and ability to organize, manage and implement the proposed clinical trial and meet milestones and timelines? Do they have appropriate expertise in study coordination, data management and statistics? For a multicenter trial, is the organizational structure appropriate and does the application identify a core of potential center investigators and staffing for a coordinating center?
Specific to this NOFO:
How well does the application address the LAO and AO collective team strengths, expertise, and scientific leadership in development of early phase cancer prevention clinical trials? How strong is the PD(s)/PI(s)'s record of scientific leadership of early experimental prevention and/or therapeutic trials (e.g., serving as scientific committee or protocol/trial study chairs, contributing new trial ideas including participating in concept development, co-authoring publications on clinical trials research)? How well does the team integrate multiple investigators and other clinical/translational scientists, including subspecialists appropriate to the clinical care of high-risk cohorts? How strong are the leadership team's expertise and ability to organize, manage, and implement complex, biomarker-driven early phase clinical trials in individuals at risk for or with early cancer? Are sufficient and appropriately experienced research personnel with the skills needed to implement early phase prevention clinical trials available?
Does the application challenge and seek to shift current research or clinical practice paradigms by utilizing novel theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions? Are the concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions novel to one field of research or novel in a broad sense? Is a refinement, improvement, or new application of theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions proposed?
Does the design/research plan include innovative elements, as appropriate, that enhance its sensitivity, potential for information or potential to advance scientific knowledge or clinical practice?
Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project? Have the investigators included plans to address weaknesses in the rigor of prior research that serves as the key support for the proposed project? Have the investigators presented strategies to ensure a robust and unbiased approach, as appropriate for the work proposed? Are potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success presented? If the project is in the early stages of development, will the strategy establish feasibility and will particularly risky aspects be managed? Have the investigators presented adequate plans to address relevant biological variables, such as sex, for studies in vertebrate animals or human subjects?
If the project involves human subjects and/or NIH-defined clinical research, are the plans to address 1) the protection of human subjects from research risks, and 2) inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals on the basis of sex/gender, race, and ethnicity, as well as the inclusion or exclusion of individuals of all ages (including children and older adults), justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed?
Does the application adequately address the following, if applicable
Study Design
Is the study design justified and appropriate to address primary and secondary outcome variable(s)/endpoints that will be clear, informative and relevant to the hypothesis being tested? Is the scientific rationale/premise of the study based on previously well-designed preclinical and/or clinical research? Given the methods used to assign participants and deliver interventions, is the study design adequately powered to answer the research question(s), test the proposed hypothesis/hypotheses, and provide interpretable results? Is the trial appropriately designed to conduct the research efficiently? Are the study populations (size, gender, age, demographic group), proposed intervention arms/dose, and duration of the trial, appropriate and well justified?
Are potential ethical issues adequately addressed? Is the process for obtaining informed consent or assent appropriate? Is the eligible population available? Are the plans for recruitment outreach, enrollment, retention, handling dropouts, missed visits, and losses to follow-up appropriate to ensure robust data collection? Are the planned recruitment timelines feasible and is the plan to monitor accrual adequate? Has the need for randomization (or not), masking (if appropriate), controls, and inclusion/exclusion criteria been addressed? Are differences addressed, if applicable, in the intervention effect due to sex/gender and race/ethnicity?
Are the plans to standardize, assure quality of, and monitor adherence to, the trial protocol and data collection or distribution guidelines appropriate? Is there a plan to obtain required study agent(s)? Does the application propose to use existing available resources, as applicable?
Data Management and Statistical Analysis
Are planned analyses and statistical approach appropriate for the proposed study design and methods used to assign participants and deliver interventions? Are the procedures for data management and quality control of data adequate at clinical site(s) or at center laboratories, as applicable? Have the methods for standardization of procedures for data management to assess the effect of the intervention and quality control been addressed? Is there a plan to complete data analysis within the proposed period of the award?
Specific to this NOFO:
How well do the research plans demonstrate an appropriate understanding of research opportunities in preventive agent development and are the proposed plans and capabilities for incorporating biomarkers, PK/PD analyses, and molecular endpoints into the clinical trials appropriate and sufficient to exploit these opportunities? To what extent are the proposed leadership and governance structure, staffing, decision-making processes, and interactions among key investigators optimal for the design, conduct and oversight of multi-disciplinary, multi-institutional clinical trials in a range of target organ sites and high-risk populations? How will the AOs be involved in the site scientific activities (e.g., committee memberships, study chair positions, training programs, etc.)? How well do the research plans demonstrate the potential to overcome critical barriers for robust accrual to clinical trials across multiple disease/target organ sites and for special populations, including minority and/or underserved populations? How will the LAO provide oversight and coordination of study development, participant accrual, and study conduct in terms of timelines for concept and protocol development, study activation and completion, biomarker analyses, and submission of abstracts and manuscripts? How capable is the CP-CTNet Site of accruing to a variety of prevention clinical trials in the areas of focus in a timely manner? How adequate is the plan to mentor young/emerging investigators and to provide them with opportunities to lead clinical trials? How are patient advocates going to be engaged to enhance the development and performance of clinical trial? How capable is the CP-CTNet Site of conducting a variety of different biomarker analyses from different types of biospecimens, including genomic, transcriptomic, and proteomic analyses?
Will the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Are the institutional support, equipment and other physical resources available to the investigators adequate for the project proposed? Will the project benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, subject populations, or collaborative arrangements?
If proposed, are the administrative, data coordinating, enrollment and laboratory/testing centers, appropriate for the trial proposed?
Does the application adequately address the capability and ability to conduct the trial at the proposed site(s) or centers? Are the plans to add or drop enrollment centers, as needed, appropriate?
If international site(s) is/are proposed, does the application adequately address the complexity of executing the clinical trial?
If multi-sites/centers, is there evidence of the ability of the individual site or center to: (1) enroll the proposed numbers; (2) adhere to the protocol; (3) collect and transmit data in an accurate and timely fashion; and, (4) operate within the proposed organizational structure?
Specific to this NOFO:
How complete is the evidence that the Research Pharmacy in the proposed LAO and its associated AOs will be able to (a) adhere to all applicable regulations with regard to investigational agent handling, (including transport and disposal); and (b) maintain proper documentation and record keeping, (transport, disposal etc.)? How adequate is the biospecimen repository and its processes to ensure that biospecimens will be properly collected, stored, catalogued, and available for analysis for the planned clinical trials as well as for future investigations?
As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will evaluate the following additional items while determining scientific and technical merit, and in providing an overall impact score, but will not give separate scores for these items.
Specific to this NOFO: The sample concepts (Attachment 2) should be reviewed, and specific comments are requested. Are the sample concepts addressing an important question, are they well-thought-out and are they feasible? Are the proposed biomarker endpoints informative? Are they likely to lead to further development of the proposed agent/strategy?
Is the study timeline described in detail, taking into account start-up activities, the anticipated rate of enrollment, and planned follow-up assessment? Is the projected timeline feasible and well justified? Does the project incorporate efficiencies and utilize existing resources (e.g., CTSAs, practice-based research networks, electronic medical records, administrative database, or patient registries) to increase the efficiency of participant enrollment and data collection, as appropriate?
Are potential challenges and corresponding solutions discussed (e.g., strategies that can be implemented in the event of enrollment shortfalls)?
For research that involves human subjects but does not involve one of the categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate the justification for involvement of human subjects and the proposed protections from research risk relating to their participation according to the following five review criteria: 1) risk to subjects, 2) adequacy of protection against risks, 3) potential benefits to the subjects and others, 4) importance of the knowledge to be gained, and 5) data and safety monitoring for clinical trials.
For research that involves human subjects and meets the criteria for one or more of the categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate: 1) the justification for the exemption, 2) human subjects involvement and characteristics, and 3) sources of materials. For additional information on review of the Human Subjects section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Human Subjects.
When the proposed project involves human subjects and/or NIH-defined clinical research, the committee will evaluate the proposed plans for the inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals on the basis of sex/gender, race, and ethnicity, as well as the inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals of all ages (including children and older adults) to determine if it is justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed. For additional information on review of the Inclusion section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Inclusion in Clinical Research.
The committee will evaluate the involvement of live vertebrate animals as part of the scientific assessment according to the following three points: (1) a complete description of all proposed procedures including the species, strains, ages, sex, and total numbers of animals to be used; (2) justifications that the species is appropriate for the proposed research and why the research goals cannot be accomplished using an alternative non-animal model; and (3) interventions including analgesia, anesthesia, sedation, palliative care, and humane endpoints that will be used to limit any unavoidable discomfort, distress, pain and injury in the conduct of scientifically valuable research. Methods of euthanasia and justification for selected methods, if NOT consistent with the AVMA Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals, is also required but is found in a separate section of the application. For additional information on review of the Vertebrate Animals Section, please refer to the Worksheet for Review of the Vertebrate Animals Section.
Reviewers will assess whether materials or procedures proposed are potentially hazardous to research personnel and/or the environment, and if needed, determine whether adequate protection is proposed.
Not applicable
For Renewals, the committee will consider the progress made in the last funding period.
Not applicable
As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will consider each of the following items, but will not give scores for these items, and should not consider them in providing an overall impact score.
Not applicable
Reviewers will assess the information provided in this section of the application, including 1) the Select Agent(s) to be used in the proposed research, 2) the registration status of all entities where Select Agent(s) will be used, 3) the procedures that will be used to monitor possession use and transfer of Select Agent(s), and 4) plans for appropriate biosafety, biocontainment, and security of the Select Agent(s).
Reviewers will comment on whether the Resource Sharing Plan(s) (e.g., Sharing Model Organisms) or the rationale for not sharing the resources, is reasonable.
For projects involving key biological and/or chemical resources, reviewers will comment on the brief plans proposed for identifying and ensuring the validity of those resources.
Reviewers will consider whether the budget and the requested period of support are fully justified and reasonable in relation to the proposed research.
Applications will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by (an) appropriate Scientific Review Group(s) convened by NCI, in accordance with NIH peer review policies and practices, using the stated review criteria. Assignment to a Scientific Review Group will be shown in the eRA Commons.
As part of the scientific peer review, all applications will receive a written critique.
Appeals of initial peer review will not be accepted for applications submitted in response to this NOFO.
Applications will be assigned on the basis of established PHS referral guidelines. Applications will compete for available funds with all other recommended applications submitted in response to this NOFO. Following initial peer review, recommended applications will receive a second level of review by the NCI Board of Scientific Advisors. The following will be considered in making funding decisions:
If the application is under consideration for funding, NIH will request "just-in-time" information from the applicant as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 2.5.1. Just-in-Time Procedures. This request is not a Notice of Award nor should it be construed to be an indicator of possible funding.
Prior to making an award, NIH reviews an applicants federal award history in SAM.gov to ensure sound business practices. An applicant can review and comment on any information in the Responsibility/Qualification records available in SAM.gov. NIH will consider any comments by the applicant in the Responsibility/Qualification records in SAM.gov to ascertain the applicants integrity, business ethics, and performance record of managing Federal awards per 2 CFR Part 200.206 Federal awarding agency review of risk posed by applicants. This provision will apply to all NIH grants and cooperative agreements except fellowships.
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. Refer to Part 1 for dates for peer review, advisory council review, and earliest start date.
Information regarding the disposition of applications is available in the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 2.4.4 Disposition of Applications.
A Notice of Award (NoA) is the official authorizing document notifying the applicant that an award has been made and that funds may be requested from the designated HHS payment system or office. The NoA is signed by the Grants Management Officer and emailed to the recipients business official.
In accepting the award, the recipient agrees that any activities under the award are subject to all provisions currently in effect or implemented during the period of the award, other Department regulations and policies in effect at the time of the award, and applicable statutory provisions.
Recipients must comply with any funding restrictions described in Section IV.6. Funding Restrictions. Any pre-award costs incurred before receipt of the NoA are at the applicant's own risk. For more information on the Notice of Award, please refer to the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 5. The Notice of Award and NIH Grants & Funding website, see Award Process.
Individual awards are based on the application submitted to, and as approved by, the NIH and are subject to the IC-specific terms and conditions identified in the NoA.
ClinicalTrials.gov: If an award provides for one or more clinical trials. By law (Title VIII, Section 801 of Public Law 110-85), the "responsible party" must register and submit results information for certain applicable clinical trials on the ClinicalTrials.gov Protocol Registration and Results System Information Website (https://register.clinicaltrials.gov). NIH expects registration and results reporting of all trials whether required under the law or not. For more information, see https://grants.nih.gov/policy/clinical-trials/reporting/index.htm
Institutional Review Board or Independent Ethics Committee Approval: Recipient institutions must ensure that all protocols are reviewed by their IRB or IEC. To help ensure the safety of participants enrolled in NIH-funded studies, the recipient must provide NIH copies of documents related to all major changes in the status of ongoing protocols.
Data and Safety Monitoring Requirements: The NIH policy for data and safety monitoring requires oversight and monitoring of all NIH-conducted or -supported human biomedical and behavioral intervention studies (clinical trials) to ensure the safety of participants and the validity and integrity of the data. Further information concerning these requirements is found at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/hs/data_safety.htm and in the application instructions (SF424 (R&R) and PHS 398).
Investigational New Drug or Investigational Device Exemption Requirements: Consistent with federal regulations, clinical research projects involving the use of investigational therapeutics, vaccines, or other medical interventions (including licensed products and devices for a purpose other than that for which they were licensed) in humans under a research protocol must be performed under a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) investigational new drug (IND) or investigational device exemption (IDE).
The following Federal wide and HHS-specific policy requirements apply to awards funded through NIH:
All federal statutes and regulations relevant to federal financial assistance, including those highlighted in NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 4 Public Policy Requirements, Objectives and Other Appropriation Mandates.
Recipients are responsible for ensuring that their activities comply with all applicable federal regulations. NIH may terminate awards under certain circumstances. See 2 CFR Part 200.340 Termination and NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 8.5.2 Remedies for Noncompliance or Enforcement Actions: Suspension, Termination, and Withholding of Support.
The following special terms of award are in addition to, and not in lieu of, otherwise applicable U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) administrative guidelines, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) grant administration regulations at 2 CFR Part 200, and other HHS, PHS, and NIH grant administration policies.
The administrative and funding instrument used for this program will be the cooperative agreement, an "assistance" mechanism (rather than an "acquisition" mechanism), in which substantial NIH programmatic involvement with the recipients is anticipated during the performance of the activities. Under the cooperative agreement, the NIH purpose is to support and stimulate the recipients' activities by involvement in and otherwise working jointly with the recipients in a partnership role; it is not to assume direction, prime responsibility, or a dominant role in the activities. Consistent with this concept, the dominant role and prime responsibility resides with the recipients for the project as a whole, although specific tasks and activities may be shared among the recipients and NIH as defined below.
The PD(s)/PI(s) will have the primary responsibility for:
In addition:
NIH staff have substantial programmatic involvement that is above and beyond the normal stewardship role in awards, as described below:
An NCI Program staff member(s) acting as a Project Scientist(s) will have substantial programmatic involvement that is above and beyond the normal stewardship role in awards, as described below. Additional NCI staff members may be designated to have substantial involvement (as Project Scientists).
The main responsibilities of substantially involved NCI staff members include, but are not limited to, the following activities:
The NCI will have access to all data (including imaging data) collected and/or generated under this Cooperative Agreement and may periodically review the data. The NCI may also review all records related to awardees performance under the award for appropriate collection, review, and distribution of biospecimens collected in association with CP-CTNet trials.
The NCI reserves the right to reduce the budget or withhold an award in the event of substantial awardee underperformance (e.g., vastly insufficient participant accrual per the protocol specified) or other substantial failure to comply with the terms of award.
Areas of Joint Responsibility include:
Steering Committee: A Steering Committee will be the governing body of CP-CTNet that will integrate the efforts of all CP-CTNet awardees and provide oversight of collaborative activities.
The Steering Committee will consist of the following voting members:
The NCI Program Official will be a non-voting member of the Steering Committee.
Additional non-voting members may be added to the committee as needed.
The Steering Committee will be chaired by a PD/PI of a CP-CTNet cooperative agreement award and will be elected by the voting members of the Steering Committee.
Key responsibilities of the Steering Committee include:
Subcommittees. The Steering Committee may establish subcommittees for specific purposes (e.g., for joint development of clinical trial protocols by CP-CTNet awardees and NCI staff members, see below). The NCI Project Scientist(s) may serve on such subcommittees, as they deem appropriate. Other NCI staff members may also be involved as needed.
Joint Development of Early Phase Prevention Clinical Trial Protocols by CP-CTNet Awardees and NCI. CP-CTNet awardees will be expected to participate as active team members and work closely with the NCI on the development of appropriate clinical trial protocols. These joint activities will include (but will not be limited to) the following aspects:
Note that in addition to these general rules for dispute resolution, a specific appeal process will be in place for decisions regarding approval of CP-CTNet study proposals and the types of studies supported by the CP-CTNet.
Dispute Resolution:
Any disagreements that may arise in scientific or programmatic matters (within the scope of the award) between recipients and NIH may be brought to Dispute Resolution. A Dispute Resolution Panel composed of three members will be convened: a designee of the Steering Committee chosen without NIH staff voting, one NIH designee, and a third designee with expertise in the relevant area who is chosen by the other two; in the case of individual disagreement, the first member may be chosen by the individual recipient. This special dispute resolution procedure does not alter the recipient's right to appeal an adverse action that is otherwise appealable in accordance with PHS regulation 42 CFR Part 50, Subpart D and HHS regulation 45 CFR Part 16.
Consistent with the 2023 NIH Policy for Data Management and Sharing, when data management and sharing is applicable to the award, recipients will be required to adhere to the Data Management and Sharing requirements as outlined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement. Upon the approval of a Data Management and Sharing Plan, it is required for recipients to implement the plan as described.
When multiple years are involved, recipients will be required to submit the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) annually and financial statements as required in the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 8.4.1 Reporting. To learn more about post-award monitoring and reporting, see the NIH Grants & Funding website, see Post-Award Monitoring and Reporting.
A final RPPR, invention statement, and the expenditure data portion of the Federal Financial Report are required for closeout of an award, as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 8.6 Closeout. NIH NOFOs outline intended research goals and objectives. Post award, NIH will review and measure performance based on the details and outcomes that are shared within the RPPR, as described at 2 CFR Part 200.301.
We encourage inquiries concerning this funding opportunity and welcome the opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants.
eRA Service Desk (Questions regarding ASSIST, eRA Commons, application errors and warnings, documenting system problems that threaten submission by the due date, and post-submission issues)
Finding Help Online: https://www.era.nih.gov/need-help (preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-402-7469 or 866-504-9552 (Toll Free)
General Grants Information (Questions regarding application instructions, application processes, and NIH grant resources)
Email: [email protected] (preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-480-7075
Grants.gov Customer Support (Questions regarding Grants.gov registration and Workspace)
Contact Center Telephone: 800-518-4726
Email: [email protected]
Eva Szabo, MD
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
Telephone: 240-276-7011
Fax: 240-276-7848
Email: [email protected]
Referral Officer
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
Telephone: 240-276-6390
Email: [email protected]
Amy Bartosch
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
OFFICE OF GRANTS ADMINISTRATION
240-276-6375
[email protected]
Recently issued trans-NIH policy notices may affect your application submission. A full list of policy notices published by NIH is provided in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts. All awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
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 Part 52 and 2 CFR Part 200.