early stage technology
play

Early-Stage Technology Development Research Tony Dickherber, Ph.D. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Title of Presentation Evaluation of NCIs Strategy for Early-Stage Technology Development Research Tony Dickherber, Ph.D. Center for Strategic Scientific Initiatives, NCI August 2017 1. Overview of the IMAT Program 2. Evaluation


  1. Title of Presentation Evaluation of NCI’s Strategy for Early-Stage Technology Development Research Tony Dickherber, Ph.D. Center for Strategic Scientific Initiatives, NCI August 2017

  2. 1. Overview of the IMAT Program 2. Evaluation Design/Approach 3. Evaluation Findings Outline 4. NIH-wide Technology Development 5. Conclusions and Next Steps 2 2

  3. Title of Presentation “Progress in science depends on new techniques, new discoveries and new ideas; probably in that order.” -Sydney Brenner

  4. NCI Support for Technology Development Title of Presentation Advanced Technology Prototyping & Development Scaling/Optimization Hardening and Concept Feasibility Dissemination Development towards Context of within Context of Use Validation Demonstration Pipeline Use Typical NIH barrier for technology Nano (IRCN-U01 & Alliance-U24) Clinical Proteomics Technology Assessment (U01, U24) Academic-Industrial Partnerships (R01) ITCR (R21, U01, U24) Low Cost Global Health Technologies (UH2/UH3, R01, R03) SBIR/STTR (R41-44) Bioengineering Research Grants (R21, R01) Genome Technology Program (R21, R01, SBIR/STTR) Common Fund Initiatives (e.g. Single Cell Technologies or Tissue Chip)

  5. IMAT Program Structure Title of Presentation Program Mission : To support the development, maturation, and dissemination of novel and potentially transformative next-generation technologies through an approach of balanced but targeted innovation in support of clinical, laboratory, or epidemiological research on cancer. Advanced Technology Prototyping & Development Scaling/Optimization Hardening and Concept Feasibility Dissemination Development towards Context of within Context of Use Validation Demonstration Pipeline Use Typical NIH barrier for technology • Feasibility/Proof-of-principle study ≤$400k over 3 years • Highly innovative technology R21 direct cost support • No preliminary data required • Advanced development • Demonstration of transformative utility ≤$900k over 3 years R33 • Requires proof of feasibility direct cost support R43 R44 ≤ $225k over 6m total ≤ $1.5M over 2 years • Development & (regulatory) validation cost support total cost support • Manufacturing & marketing plan • Feasibility study • Requires proof of feasibility and Two Tracks: 1. Molecular/Cellular Analysis Technologies (MCA) • Clear commercial Fast-Track commercialization plan • Demonstration of transformative utility potential 2. Biospecimen Science Technologies (BST)

  6. What is a “biospecimen science” technology? Title of Presentation • Sample Quality Control ( e.g., RNALater) – Focus on preserving the biological integrity of the molecular and cellular targets to be assessed – Spans the preanalytical time period from patient management variables, through sample procurement, immediate handling and preservation, and processing and sample preparation in advance of analysis • Sample Quality Assessment ( e.g., RIN) – Focus on verifying/assessing the biological integrity of the molecular and cellular targets to be tested/measured

  7. Distinguishing Features of IMAT Title of Presentation • Solicitation: – Emphasis on innovative technology with transformative potential ( i.e. high-risk, high-impact) – Focus exclusively on technology development ( NOT biological/clinical hypothesis-driven research ) – 100% investigator-initiated research grants • Review: – Special emphasis panels recruited based on focus of submissions, drawing heavily from former IMAT grantees – Milestone-based applications to quantitatively assess the capabilities of the technology ( e.g. , specificity, sensitivity, and speed) and characterize the improvement over state-of-the-art

  8. IMAT New Award Distribution by FY Title of Presentation BST: Biospecimen Science Technologies MCA: Molecular/Cellular Analysis Technologies BST R33 BST R21 MCA R33 MCA R21 Success Rate 45 45% 40 40% 35 35% Success Rate Total # of Awards 30 30% 25 25% 20 20% 15 15% 10 10% 5 5% 0 0% Fiscal Year Issued as PAR 8

  9. General Breakdown of the IMAT Portfolio Title of Presentation Technologies for Clinical Treatment and Diagnosis • Drug screening platforms • Patient-derived tumor modeling • Diagnostic imaging agents Cancer Biology Technologies • Cancer-targeting • Molecular fingerprinting (-omic discovery) • Drug delivery vehicles • Molecular interactions 40% • Point-of-care diagnostics • Cancer modeling • et cetera… • Imaging/spectroscopy probes 47% • Sample preparation • Mechanobiololgy/microrheology • et cetera… 9% Early Detection Screening 4% • Point-of-care detection • Field sample collection and storage Molecular Epidemiology Tools • Liquid biopsy platforms • Population-scale analysis • et cetera… • Low-resource setting point-of-care screening • et cetera…

  10. Active IMAT Portfolio Title of Presentation Application & Validation of Emerging Technologies for Cancer Research (R33) Innovative Technologies for Cancer Research (R21) o Optimization/scaling or other further development o Initial proof-of-concept o Analytical/technical validation in biological context of use o Quantifiable milestone driven development plan Current R21 Portfolio Current R33 Portfolio clinical diagnostics (75 Active Projects) drug screening (49 Active Projects) epigenomics 2 1 8 genomics 1 4 2 6 glycomics 5 4 5 imaging 2 1 immunotherapy 3 liquid biopsy 4 6 4 metabolomics 2 modeling 5 3 novel biosensor 2 4 pathway tools 3 proteomics 4 3 6 sample prep 1 6 3 sample QA 4 6 1 single cell 2 3 8 transcriptomics treatment

  11. 1. Overview of the IMAT Program 2. Evaluation Design/Approach 3. Evaluation Findings Outline 4. NIH-wide Technology Development 5. Conclusions and Next Steps 11

  12. IMAT FOA & Evaluation History Title of Presentation IMAT RFAs Approved for 3 RFAs Renewed for 5 years RFAs Renewed for 3 years IMAT PAR Released • 3 R21 (1 is a 3-yr award) • 2 R21 (3 yr awards) years • 1 R21/R33 • 3 R21/R33 • 2 R33 • 2 R33 • 1 STTR/SBIR • 2 STTR/SBIR • 2 STTR • 2 SBIR RFAs Renewed for 1 year RFA Renewed for 3 years • 2 R21 (3 yr awards) IMAT PAR Renewed • 2 R21 • 2 R21/R33 • 2 R33 • 2 R33 • 1 STTR/SBIR • Competitive Revisions RFAs Renewed for 2 years • 2 R21 (both 3-yr awards) IMAT PAR Renewed • 2 R33 • 2 R21/R33 • 2 STTR/SBIR Ongoing Evaluation Evaluative Update Evaluation Feasibility Study Full Program Targeted Evaluation Evaluation Full Program (until FY2016) Evaluation

  13. Evaluation Criteria Title of Presentation • number of publications that cite a specific IMAT award number; • number of patent applications submitted to the US Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO); • number of patent applications granted or approved by the USPTO based on patent applications that cite a specific IMAT award number in one of four government interest fields; number of IMAT ‐ funded technologies now used in other NCI and NIH strategic • initiatives; and follow ‐ up case studies on previously funded technology development projects and • platforms, including their current use by and utility to the extramural scientific and clinical communities. 13

  14. 2015-16 IMAT Evaluation Overview Title of Presentation • Group: Ripple Effect Communications • Design: From Macro International during a prior Evaluation Feasibility Study for the IMAT program (2007) – Key: Follow each technology from before target award to after to understand how the program/intervention affected the outcome • Focus: Outcomes for all IMAT project prior to 2014 – 705 unique awards (including SBIR and STTR) – archival data records, web-surveys, and phone interviews – Included web-survey of and archival data analysis for a comparison group and phone interviews with IMAT technology end-users 14

  15. Logic Model (Conceptual Framework) Title of Presentation Courtesy Ripple Effect Communications 15

Recommend


More recommend