Dennis Steindler Application: Excerpt from Review Summary

Posted: September 9, 2012 at 3:58 pm


The CIRM summary of the review on the
$6.7 million grant to recruit Florida scientist Dennis Steindler to
the Parkinson's Institute in California carried a strong minority report. However, the review itself drew fire this morning from some CIRM board members.
They included patient advocate Jeff Sheehy, co-vice chair of the grant review group, who supported approval of the grant. He noted that the low score reflected two extreme opinions. He said some of the reviewers were doing their research on the Parkinson's Institute on the Internet during the actual review.  Sheehy said that was not a "good way" to perform a review and reflected a "major short-coming." 
Here is an excerpt from the review.

"In summary, this is an
application from an established leader in NSC biology to pursue
research focused on disease mechanisms in PD. Strengths of the
proposal include the quality of the PI, the focus of the project on
an interesting hypothesis, and the leadership in basic science that
the candidate would bring to the applicant institution. Weaknesses
included deficiencies in the research plan, the limited track-record
of the PI in PD research and an institutional environment lacking
adequate support for basic science investigations."

The summary continued, 

"During programmatic discussion some GWG (grant review group) members cited a need to broaden stem cell leadership not only at the
large universities but also at the smaller institutions as well. They
felt that the candidate's recruitment would strengthen the applicant
institution and provide leadership and strength in basic research.
The need for increased research focused on Parkinson's Disease was
also cited by some reviewers. A motion to recommend the application
for funding carried with a majority vote. Because more than 35% of
GWG members opposed the motion, opponents have exercised their right
to have that position reported to the ICOC. The consensus statement
from this group is as follows: 'Despite the facts that the
applicant has many excellent attributes, that Parkinson's disease is
a key area of interest, and that the applicant institution may
deserve additional consideration, our opinion is that the application
clearly falls short in several critical scientific areas that
outweigh the programmatic concerns and do not justify a
recommendation for funding. We believe that the people of California
depend upon us to make recommendations based on our scientific
expertise, for outcomes that are most likely to impact medicine and
the health and treatment of their citizens. We believe that their
money can be better spent.'"

Source:
http://californiastemcellreport.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

Related Posts