They are competing in the $35 million
basic biology grant round to be acted on tomorrow and Thursday by the
governing board of the agency. They join four other scientists who
are also asking the board to overturn reviewer rejection of their
applications.
The latest three appellants are Song Li of UC Berkeley, who
is seeking $1.3 million: Yanhong Shi of the City of Hope, who is
asking for $1.4 million, and Wange Lu of USC, who is seeking $1.3 million..
Of the total of seven researchers
appealing decisions, five received higher scientific scores on their
applications than the lowest approved by reviewers.
Of the latest three appellants, Shi
received a scientific score of 70, ranking above three grants
approved by reviewers. Li's application received a scientific score of 67, ranking above two grants approved by reviewers. Li received international attention last June with published research that identified an “evil” stem cell
involving heart disease. CIRM did not
release a score for Lu's application but its review summary was
listed below that of the lowest scoring application that was
approved.
The lower scoring but successful
applications were all given the go-ahead on the basis of
“programmatic” reasons, which one
CIRM document says is designed to allow “consideration of
issues beyond scientific merit, such as disease representation and
societal impact.”
Shi defended her application on what
CIRM might call programmatic grounds. She also pointed to new
developments in her research. Li pointed to his “ground-breaking” findings in June to support his application, research,
in this case, that was published. (Li's research on "evil" stem cells was reported early in June, more than two weeks prior to the review of his application. It is unclear whether the research was part of the discussion about his application.) Lu said that reviewer comments on her
application were “biased away from the current state of the art.”
The seven appeals follow a record outpouring in July. During this week's week meeting, the CIRM
governing board is expected to move to curb researcher appeals. More
are likely be heard in the future as the reviewers diverge from
scientific scores as they make their decisions.
(Editor's note: The information on the timing of Li's research on "evil" stem cells and review of his application was not included last night in the original version of this item.)
(Editor's note: The information on the timing of Li's research on "evil" stem cells and review of his application was not included last night in the original version of this item.)
No comments:
Post a Comment