The route to a cancer cure isn’t a straight line or even a single line. It’s the paths of thousands of researchers who walk into their labs every day, driven by hope and determination, to unlock and solve the mysteries of this widespread fatal disease.
Cancer research in the U.S. is backed by a complex system of interdependent funding. Partners include academia, pharmaceutical companies, biotechnology start-ups, federal agencies and private foundations. These groups rely heavily on each other and, when one struggles, the entire system suffers.
Here, Jeffrey MacKeigan explains how cancer research funding works and what happens if there are cuts to those budgets. MacKeigan is a cancer biologist, a senior advisor for the Michigan State University Office of Research and Innovation and professor in theDepartment of Pediatrics and Human Development in the MSU College of Human Medicine.
What’s the benefit of cancer research for patients, friends and families?
It’s tremendous when measured in lives saved! According to the American Cancer Society, cancer research saved 4.5 million people from 1991 to 2022, including parents, spouses, grandparents, children, siblings and friends.
Decades of hard-won discoveries made by thousands of researchers have enabled people with cancer to live longer and enjoy a better quality of life. We are definitely making progress when it comes to identifying healthier lifestyle choices, better diagnostic tools and tests, and better treatments.
What is the cancer research funding ecosystem?
Cancer research funding comes from multiple sources. Academic institutions work in partnership with federal agencies as well as private foundations, pharmaceutical companies and biotechnology start-ups. If any one of these groups falters, the whole system is affected.
Philanthropic funding is a key element in the cancer research ecosystem, especially when it comes to testing new ideas and running riskier projects that can lead to critical breakthroughs. Plus, foundation money comes with fewer constraints than government funds, which allows for faster, more nimble scientific exploration. However, philanthropic funding is smaller in scale and often disease specific. There are some types of cancers that don’t have foundations dedicated to finding their cure. Also, the amount of funding from philanthropies can vary widely from year to year.
Private-sector innovation has led the way in many oncology developments, including novel immunotherapies and new pharmaceuticals. Many lives have been saved thanks to their efforts. Even so, companies tend to focus on areas with the potential for strong financial returns. This means rare and pediatric cancers often go unfunded by companies that must prioritize profit to stay afloat.
How will cancer research be affected by recent national budget cuts?
Federal agencies are the primary funding organizations for cancer research and their budget cuts are causing lab closures. Projects are stalling or ceasing. Scientists — especially those who are early in their careers — are rethinking their commitment to science. This means that progress made with the investment of federal funds for the past several decades will be lost. And our brightest scientists may be lost. And the progress of cancer treatment will likely be slower for many years to come. Clinical trials will sharply decline and be unable to maintain their impact. It’s not what I want for my friends and family members.
What would help ensure that research continues?
Our best path forward is to build on the progress we’ve already made in building a cancer research ecosystem. For sure, we need philanthropy and industry dollars. What’s most critical is continued support from the federal government.
A robust partnership among all members of the research ecosystem will provide predictable, long-term budgets that allow us to move cancer discoveries from the lab bench to the bedside so more people can live healthier, longer lives.
MacKeigan provides more detail on the cancer research ecosystem in an article published in The Conversation: Cancer research in the US is world class because of its broad base of funding — with the government pulling out, its future is uncertain.