Advertisement
tecaLAB
tecaLAB

Funding Mishaps Rattle Review Panel

Every member of the scientific review panel at Texas’s $3-billion cancer research funding agency has quit, citing concerns about a lack of proper peer review.

By | October 16, 2012

Wikimedia Commons, Kuebi The Cancer Prevention Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT) is facing questions after its entire 8-member scientific review council resigned, blaming serious concerns about the integrity of the funding agency’s peer-review procedure. And it seems many of the institute’s roster of 100 expert peer reviewers, based at universities across the country, are also worried enough to quit.

CPRIT was established in 2007 to allocate up to $3 billion dollars from bond sales over 10 years for cancer research and prevention across Texas. But problems surfaced earlier this year with regard to how funding decisions are made.

This past May, Alfred Gilman, the Nobel Prize-winning biochemist who served as chief scientific officer of CPRIT, announced that he would step down this fall because the board had approved an “incubator” grant of up to $18 million to the University of Texas (UT) MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston after a 3-week deliberation that did not involve proper scientific review.  The board had also delayed grants, many destined for Gilman’s former employer, the UT Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas—a move that Gilman viewed as an act of favoritism. 

Gilman stepped down last week (October 12), followed swiftly by another Nobel Prize winner, Phillip Sharp of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in Cambridge, who was chair of the review council. “Clearly there has been pressure at the board level to do things differently [to peer review],” Sharp told ScienceInsider.

All the other council members have now either resigned or signaled their intention to do so, and many of the 100 or so scientists who sit on panels overseen by the council are stepping down for similar reasons, according to council members consulted by Science.

CPRIT sought to downplay the departures and reaffirm their commitment to peer review. “We have identified several exceptional candidates to succeed Dr. Gilman as Chief Scientific Officer, and this individual's first order of business will be to recruit outstanding cancer experts to serve as peer reviewers under his or her leadership,” the agency said in a statement. “We have every confidence that CPRIT will have a full cadre of expert peer reviewers in place for the next scientific review cycle.”

Advertisement

Add a Comment

Avatar of: You

You

Processing...
Processing...

Sign In with your LabX Media Group Passport to leave a comment

Not a member? Register Now!

LabX Media Group Passport Logo

Comments

Avatar of: Russel

Russel

Posts: 1

October 16, 2012

"We have every confidence that CPRIT will have a full cadre of expert peer reviewers in place for the next scientific review cycle.”  The concern being will they be experts with the moral fiber of those who quit, or are they finding experts who will just rubber stamp what the board wants.  That is the most important question.  It appears the board is just trying to do Damage control at this point until they get in who they now want.

Follow The Scientist

icon-facebook icon-linkedin icon-twitter icon-vimeo icon-youtube
Advertisement
Panasonic
Panasonic

Stay Connected with The Scientist

  • icon-facebook The Scientist Magazine
  • icon-facebook The Scientist Careers
  • icon-facebook Neuroscience Research Techniques
  • icon-facebook Genetic Research Techniques
  • icon-facebook Cell Culture Techniques
  • icon-facebook Microbiology and Immunology
  • icon-facebook Cancer Research and Technology
  • icon-facebook Stem Cell and Regenerative Science
Advertisement
Advertisement
Life Technologies