Pediatric Research Funding
Childhood arthritis is the number-one cause of acquired disability in children and the sixth most common childhood disease. It is estimated that 300,000 children in the United States suffer from some form of arthritis or rheumatic disease. Many childhood rheumatic diseases are different from those that start in adulthood, yet most pediatric rheumatic diseases are treated with the same drugs used in adults. Basic research and clinical trials in pediatric rheumatology are the only way to find the specific causes and the right treatments for these diseases. Less than 2% of the annual NIAMS budget was allocated to support pediatric rheumatology research in the past four years. Currently funded projects include 11 basic and eight clinical trial/translational research projects, distributed among half of the 25 ACGME-accredited pediatric rheumatology divisions across the United States.
The current budget is clearly insufficient to address the scientific challenges in the field. NIAMS leads the main research effort in pediatric rheumatic diseases, and a further decrease in its FY 2007 budget will definitely have an effect on the already slim funding of arthritis and related rheumatic diseases in children. It will hamper basic research and patient care both in the short term – by not providing novel therapies – and even more importantly in the long term – by not training a new generation of pediatric rheumatologists to conduct clinical research.
The ACR supports a proposal to triple NIH funding for FY 2008 and provide annual increases in the NIAMS budget, and opposes the use of budgetary mechanisms that arbitrarily limit research funding. The ACR also supports the National Arthritis Action Plan and arthritis-related funding activities from the CDC.
Interestingly, very few scientist and physicians are taking a proactive approach to ask Congress to increase the NIH budget. This passivity has been explained in a number of ways, including lack of time, ignorance on how to proceed to press for additional funding, and a misconception that other people are engaged so there is no need for a scientist or physician to get involved. It is imperative that more voices be heard so that we do not encounter a lost generation of researchers and the implications this has for healthcare and biomedical science development. Voices of physicians and scientists are needed to send a message to Congress that these severe cuts in federal research funding are jeopardizing very important advancements in biomedical research. Assuring a vital research workforce for the future is imperative for the health of the United States.
