Harvard Breast Cancer Research Faces Funding Disruptions
Research led by Dr. Joan Brugge at Harvard Medical School, focusing on breast cancer prevention, has experienced significant disruptions due to federal funding issues. The project, funded by a seven-year, $7 million grant from the National Cancer Institute (NIH), aims to prevent breast cancer, a disease affecting approximately 1 in 8 U.S. women and some men.
Research Findings and Goals
Brugge's team analyzes breast tissue samples to map the development of breast cancer, from initial cell mutation to tumor formation. The research identified specific cells containing the genetic precursors of breast tumors, which were found to be common in both cancerous and healthy breast tissue samples. The immediate objective of the research is to develop methods for detecting, isolating, and eliminating these mutant cells before they form tumors.
Grant Freeze and Personnel Impact
In April, the NIH grant for Brugge's lab, along with most federal funding for Harvard researchers, was frozen. The Trump administration stated this action was taken due to the university's handling of antisemitism on campus. As a result, some lab staff lost federal fellowships, and others were informed that salary guarantees could not be maintained. The lab experienced a reduction of seven employees out of 18.
Funding Restoration and Subsequent Challenges
The NIH funding was restored in September. However, during the freeze, the Trump administration had prohibited Harvard researchers, including Brugge, from applying for subsequent multiyear grants. While a federal judge later lifted this prohibition, Brugge had missed the application deadline for renewal. Consequently, her current funding is scheduled to conclude in August.
To address the funding gap, Brugge sought private funding, which enabled the reinstatement of two positions for a minimum of one year.
National Funding Landscape for Cancer Research
The future of federal funding for cancer research nationally remains uncertain. President Trump has proposed a nearly 40% reduction in the NIH budget for fiscal year 2026. A White House budget message cited "wasteful spending, misleading information, risky research, and the promotion of dangerous ideologies" by the NIH as reasons for the proposed cuts.
In contrast, Congressional proposals differ:
- The House budget plan includes a $48 million increase, bringing the NIH budget to $46.9 billion.
- The Senate plan proposes an additional $400 million, including $150 million specifically for cancer research.
These differing budget proposals are currently unresolved.
Broader Implications and Staff Exodus
Advocates, such as Mark Fleury of the American Cancer Society, have highlighted the role of federally funded research in the 34% decline in the cancer death rate since the early 1990s. Fleury stated that reductions in research funding could affect patient treatment options. The Congressional Budget Office projects that a 10% cut to the NIH budget could result in two fewer new drugs or treatments annually. A Massachusetts Institute of Technology study indicated that over half of FDA-approved drugs developed with NIH funding since 2000 might not have materialized with a 40% smaller NIH budget.
Brugge reports dedicating approximately half of her time to securing new funding and managing staff concerns, rather than focusing on research. The operational changes in her lab have also impacted the development of future cancer researchers. Of seven staff members who departed this year, one relocated internationally, one joined a health care management company, four pursued further education, and one remains in job search.
One former computational biologist, identified as Y, moved to Switzerland for a research and Ph.D. program. Y cited concerns about potential visa implications upon returning to the U.S. for scientific conferences, which influenced the decision to use only her initial.
Brugge has also ceased accepting job applicants from outside the U.S. due to an inability to cover the Trump administration's new $100,000 fee for foreign researcher visas. This fee is currently subject to a legal challenge by the Association of American Universities and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, who assert it is misguided and illegal. The Trump administration stated the fee's purpose is to reduce reliance on foreign workers and enhance opportunities for American citizens.
Brugge foresees ongoing operational challenges for her lab, citing concerns about future actions that could trigger similar disruptions.