[bionet.sci-resources] NIH Guide for Contracts and Grants, vol. 19, no. 2, pt. 3, 2 March

kristoff@GENBANK.BIO.NET (Dave Kristofferson) (03/02/90)

REQUEST FOR COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT APPLICATIONS:
RFA-90-HD-01

COOPERATIVE MULTICENTER NETWORK OF NEONATAL INTENSIVE CARE UNITS

P.T. 34, FF, II; K.W. 0775020, 0775025, 0411005, 0710030, 0785035

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development

Application Receipt Date:  May 22, 1990

PURPOSE

The National Institute of Health and Human Development
(NICHD) invites applications from investigators to
participate with the NICHD under a Cooperative Agreement in
an ongoing multicenter clinical study designed to
investigate the safety and efficacy of treatment and
management strategies to care for infants in Neonatal
Intensive Care Units (NICU).  The objective of this study is
to facilitate evaluation of these strategies by establishing
a network of centers using common protocols to study the
requisite number of patients in order to provide answers
more rapidly than individual centers acting alone.

The NICHD program staff will assist the principal
investigators of the selected NICUs and the Advisory Board
in identifying research topics of high priority and in
designing protocols appropriate to the evaluation of optimal
management in these areas.

It is anticipated that 8 to 10 clinical centers will be
selected for the program.

The deadline for receipt of applications is May 22, 1990.
Applications received after this date will not be
considered.  Only institutions in the United States will be
eligible for participation.

ADMINISTRATIVE BACKGROUND

Modern neonatal medicine has introduced a number of
principles of management and innovative methodologies
without rigorous use of the controlled observation necessary
for the objective evaluation of many of these innovations.
A major problem has been the balance between assuring prompt
implementation of new technologies, procedures, treatments
and drugs, and adequate evaluation of their safety and
efficacy.  Indeed, because of the urgent demands of sick
patients, care is often based on limited knowledge of new
modalities not subjected to critical studies prior to
introduction and use.  In a critically ill baby, an
innovative idea may be tried which, if the baby's condition
improves, can rapidly set a new trend, and become the
standard of care.  Therefore, their incorporation into the
NICUs arsenal of therapies frequently is based on limited
experience, and their efficacy and/or safety have not been
evaluated scientifically.

The cooperative nature of the present approach allows the
study of significant clinical problems occurring too
infrequently for any one institution to have adequate
numbers for a valid clinical study within a reasonable time
span.  This is an important consideration in view of trends
that exist in NICUs, where therapeutic interventions may
change within months before adequate studies of safety and
efficacy are initiated, much less completed.  This approach
facilitates the review and approval by Institutional Review
Boards (IRB) of protocols that address complex clinical
research questions that result from the joint efforts by:
NICHD staff; an Advisory Board composed of leading
neonatologists, consulting experts, clinical trial experts;
and the Network Steering Committee.  Protocols will be
developed to evaluate therapeutic management of major
problems currently at issue in NICUs.  In addition, the
Newborn Network will address important issues of newborn
care through observational studies designed to assess the
consequences of disease, procedures, and therapeutic
interventions, as well as to generate hypotheses concerning
future treatment strategies.  In addition to the rigorous
follow-up evaluation provided by successful applicants, the
Newborn Network may fund specialized follow-up studies
designed to elucidate unique physiologic, developmental, and
social risks of its study population.

In an attempt to respond to the need for well-designed
clinical neonatal medicine trials, the NICHD established a
cooperative multicenter Network of Neonatal Intensive Care
Units in 1986.  Seven participating university centers and a
Data Center were selected among respondents to a Request for
Applications (RFA).  This Newborn Network maintains a
generic data base on all infants admitted at <1500 grams.
Protocols on the prevention of sepsis, intraventricular
hemorrhage, pulmonary hypertension, and surfactant
administration have been initiated.  Centers that join the
Network in the next award period (beginning April 1, 1991)
would be expected to participate in the protocols ongoing at
that time.  Future protocols in all major areas of newborn
pathophysiology including cerebral function, pulmonary
physiology, gastrointestinal function and nutrition,
immunology, etc., are of interest.  Also of interest are the
evaluation of drugs in the newborn and the rapid transfer of
new technologies to neonatal medicine.

RESEARCH SCOPE

NICHD invites applications from both current members of the
NICU Network (competitive continuation applications) and
prospective members (new applications).  The minimum
requirements for applicants, investigators, and their NICU
research units are as follows:

1.  Participants must be based in a level III neonatal
intensive care unit that admits both inborn and outborn
patients.  Professional staffing of the unit should include
at least of four full-time board-certified neonatologists.

2.  The NICU should be located in an institution with a
perinatal program that delivers high-risk pregnancies and
has at least one full-time perinatologist on staff.  There
should be a history of cooperation between neonatology and
obstetrics toward excellence in clinical care, maintenance
of a data base, and research productivity.  An obstetrician
who has documented interest and experience with clinical
trial research and is willing to participate in the NICU
Network should be designated.

3.  The applicant NICU should have an established
perinatal/neonatal data system, preferably computerized,
with experience in defining and quantitating patient
populations for clinical studies.  All successful applicants
must be willing to provide complete, accurate, and timely
data to the NICU generic data base.

4.  Applicant NICUs should have at least 500 admissions per
year including both inborn and outborn infants.  No more
than 30% of admissions should be outborn.  Large perinatal
centers will be given preference to combined services
composed of a small inborn unit and a transfer/tertiary care
service.

5.  The applicant NICU should have state-of-the-art
facilities and clinical capabilities, including bedside
monitors with trend capabilities, noninvasive methods of
oxygen and carbon dioxide determination, the current
generation of ventilators, etc.  A full complement of
pediatric subspecialists should also be available including
cardiology, gastroenterology, infectious disease and
immunology, neurology, nephrology, ophthalmology, pathology,
pulmonology, surgery, genetics and development medicine, and
nutrition.  A full-time respiratory therapy program and
pharmacy capable of supporting clinical research must also
be available.  Appropriate laboratory facilities should
include hematology, chemistry, endocrinology, blood bank,
blood gas, microbiology, serology, and immunology.  A
specialized radiology program (CAT scan, portable x-ray, and
portable ultrasound for echocardiography and head
ultrasound), and portable EEG facilities must be available
and freely accessible to the NICU.  Magnetic resonance
imaging is desirable.

6.  The applicant NICU should have an established neonatal
follow-up clinic (short and long-term) with several years of
experience in following patients from the NICU.  The
majority (70%) of infants less than 1500 grams who have been
discharged from the NICU should be enrolled in the program,
as well as other infants at risk for developmental delay.
The professional staff should include a developmental
pediatrician or neonatologist with developmental expertise.
Specialists available to consult should include pediatric
neurology, pediatric psychology, occupational and/or
physical therapy, and pediatric ophthalmology, as well as
social services.  A system of ongoing data collection on
these infants must be operational.

7.  The applicant NICU should clearly express its interest
to participate in a cooperative manner with other centers,
the NICHD, and the Data Coordinating Center in the
definition of research protocols, uniform data forms, and
data transfer.

8.  There should be a firm departmental and institutional
commitment to collaborative neonatal research as
demonstrated by a documented history of clinical research
productivity (recruitment performance, publications, etc.)
in past or present clinical trials.

9.  The application must exhibit a preparedness to pursue
capitation of operational costs for each protocol in the
Network (see Budget section).

10.  The NICHD also funds clinical research in a
Maternal-Fetal Network whose applications will be due on May
22, 1990.  NICHD encourages applications from institutions
that propose participation in both the Neonatal and the
Maternal-Fetal Networks.

DIRECTION AND MANAGEMENT OF THE NETWORK

The management of the NICU Network includes three committees
as follows:

1.  A Steering Committee will be responsible for protocol
development, assisted by the Advisory Board and the Data
Safety and Monitoring Committee.  The Steering Committee
will have primary responsibility for the conduct of
protocols and the preparation of publications.  The Steering
Committee will be composed of each principal investigator,
one representative from the Data Center, and three NICHD
staff.  NICHD staff will comprise the Director of the Center
for Research for Mothers and Children (CRMC), a
neonatologist from the Pregnancy and Perinatology Branch
(NICU program officer), and a representative from the
Epidemiology and Biometry Research Program.  The NICU
program officer will be the only voting NICHD staff member
of the Steering Committee.  An outside chairman, who is not
participating as a principal investigator, will be selected
by the NICHD.

2.  An Advisory Board will advise the Steering Commmittee in
the identification and prioritization of topics for network
research.  The Advisory Board, chosen by the NICHD with the
advice of the Steering Committee, will be composed of
individuals with expertise in clinical trials,
biostatistics, epidemiology, perinatology, and neonatology;
the Chairman of the Steering Committee; and the Director of
the CRMC and the NICU program officer.  Additional members
will participate based on the need for specific expertise.

3.  A Data Safety and Monitoring Committee will monitor the
safety of ongoing clinical trials and advise on their
conduct.  It will be established by NICHD and will represent
expertise in ethics, clinical trial design, neonatology,
perinatology, and basic science.

CONTENT OF APPLICATION

The application should include the following, presented in
the following order in the application:

1.  NICU Staffing.  Provide complete descriptions of the
training and qualifications of the principal investigator
and neonatal staff who will participate.  Specify the past
and current involvement in clinical and basic research and
their availability to take primary responsibility for
research protocols in the NICU Network.  Detail the current
pattern of research nurse staffing of clinical trials in the
unit, including arrangements for recruitment into protocols
during evening, nighttime, and weekend hours.  Provide
specific information on research nurses who would be
available for Network assignment.

2.  Obstetrical Staffing.  Identify an obstetrician who
would collaborate actively in protocol development.  Provide
a description of his/her training, qualifications, basic and
clinical research involvement, and availability as above.
Document current collaborative relationships between the
neonatal and obstetrical services to promote excellence in
clinical care, teaching, and research.

3.  Perinatal Data System.  Describe the data system used by
the perinatology/neonatology units and document how it has
been and is being used to plan and carry out clinical
research.  Include the data form as an appendix.

4.  Available Population of Clinical Research Subjects.
Applicants are encouraged to include females and minorities
among study populations.  If minorities or females are not
included, a clear rationale for their exclusion should be
provided.  Characterize the patients served by the NICU as
follows:

a. Number of deliveries and delivery mode.

b. Description of the obstetrical population, including
percentage of high-risk deliveries, racial mix, payment
categories, maternal risk factors (diabetes mellitus, human
immunodeficiency virus (HIV), substance abuse, pregnancy
induced-hypertension, etc.).

c. NICU admissions and survival data by birthweight
categories; average length of stay; back-transfer policies.

d. Newborn surgical cases (inborn versus outborn), type,
survival.

e. Referral patterns, transport data (maternal versus
infant), and a description of the transport system.

f. Complications of NICU care, including nosocomial
infection, intracranial hemorrhage, periventricular
leukomalacia, necrotizing enterocolitis, bronchopulmonary
dysplasia (BPD), rickets, etc.

Specify the various subgroups that have been eligible for,
and have actually been randomized, in previous or current
clinical trials.

5.  Clinical strengths and weaknesses of the NICU and
Obstetrical Services.  Describe in detail the clinical
attributes of the NICU (see #4 above) including the
following:

a. Quality of clinical care (a description of the neonatal
training program, fellow/resident/nurse practitioner
staffing patterns, nurse/patient ratio.

b. A description of the NICU treatment philosophy, including
ventilatory management, nutrition, support of the extremely
low birth-weight infant, infection surveillance, use of
steroids, etc.

c. NICU facilities and physical plant (number of beds, level
of intensity, monitoring capabilities, office space,
computer facilities, etc.).

d. Specialized support staff including research nurses,
biomedical and computer specialists, Ph.D. research
personnel, etc.

e. Pediatric subspecialty services.

f. Support services and laboratories.

Indicate how clinical services have been modified, if
necessary, to support clinical research in the past.
Finally, discuss any perceived weaknesses in the NICU
clinical care system and review planned solutions.

Describe the organization, service load, and clinical
attributes of the affiliated obstetrical/perinatal service,
with special attention to antenatal fetal testing,
intrapartum diagnosis, and perinatal pathology.  Also
describe high-risk management, including the use of
steroids, antibiotics, tocolysis, management of
hypertension, cesarean rate, chorionic villus sampling,
fetal surgery, etc.

6.  NICU Follow-up Program.  Describe the NICU follow-up
program including the following:

a. Number and characteristics of infants followed, duration
of follow up, dropout rate.

b. Report of developmental outcome of NICU graduates from
1984-1989.

c. Professional staff.

d. A bibliography of publications from the follow-up
program.

e. Affiliated programs, i.e. BPD clinic, Sudden Infant Death
Syndrome program, substance abuse, or HIV clinics, etc.

f. An example of forms used (include in appendix).

7.  Intent to Participate.  Based on your understanding of
the NICU Network's structure and function, indicate specific
ways in which NICU policies and procedures could be modified
to allow effective participation in randomized, multi-center
clinical trials.  Specifically, indicate your preparedness
to participate in network clinical trials according to the
terms and conditions of this RFA.

8.  Department and Institutional Commitment and Experience.
Provide letters of commitment from all involved departments
to ensure optimal cooperation for network protocols.
Provide evidence of research productivity by the applicant
unit in previous or current clinical trials, especially of a
collaborative nature.  An example of a non-Network clinical
protocol which has been completed or is underway should be
provided including IRB approval (the protocol and IRB
approval should be submitted as an appendix).  An
accompanying narrative should describe trial preparation
(retrospective studies, identification of the study
population, funding applications, budget preparation),
conduct of the trial (recruitment of patients, integration
with other clinical research, assignment of costs to
research versus clinical care), resolution of problems
encountered, results, and their implications.

Applicants who are reapplying as current NICU Network
members should provide a separate description of their
participation in the NICU Network protocols to date.
Include in this description the numbers of patients enrolled
and completed, percent enrollment of available patients, and
the nature and extent of staff involvement as it affected
performance.  Also, current NICU Network members should
summarize how they have met the terms of award that
accompanied the Notice of Award for their initial grant
period.

9.  Acceptance of Budgetary Mechanism.  Provide statements
from the department and the institutional sponsored program
office assuring cooperation in obtaining the required
services and data described above for the NICU Network and
assuring cooperation with the proposed plan to capitate
operational costs for each protocol.  This section should
also include a discussion of innovative ideas to make the
conduct of clinical trials within the NICU Network more
efficient and cost-effective.

MECHANISM OF SUPPORT - Terms of the Agreement

The funding mechanism to be used to assist the scientific
community in undertaking this system of clinical
investigation will be a Cooperative Agreement between the
participating units and NICHD.  The major difference between
a Cooperative Agreement and a research grant is that there
will be substantial programmatic involvement of NICHD staff
above and beyond the levels required for traditional program
management of grants.  Specifically, the role of the NICHD
NICU program officer will be to aid the awardees and the
Steering Committee in the following ways:

o Assistance in the identification of important areas of
study.

o Assistance in the development of study protocols.

o Assistance in the development and review of
capitation-based budgets, including the identification of
study costs and special institutional needs.

o Assistance in the review and evaluation of each stage of
the program before subsequent stages are started, in
conjunction with the principal investigators, the Steering
Committee, and the Advisory Board.

o Assistance in reporting results to the community of
investigators and health care recipients.

Programmatic responsibility for review and oversight of
these Cooperative Agreements will reside with the NICU
program officer.  This role will include the following:

o Assurance of the scientific merit of the trials, including
the option to withhold support of a participating center if
technical performance requirements such as protocol
compliance, enrollment targets, or randomization of subjects
are not met.

o Assistance in the efficient conduct of the trials,
including ongoing review of progress; redirection of
activities to improve performance and cooperation if
necessary; and frequent communication with other members of
the Steering Committee.

o Initiation of a decision to modify or terminate a study
based on the advice of the Data Center, Data Safety and
Monitoring Committee, and Advisory Committee with the mutual
consent of the Steering Committee.

The responsibilities and authorities of the awardees will be
as follows:

o Identification of priority issues for research.

o Development and implementation of protocols.

o Collection and transmission of accurate data in a timely
manner.

o Analysis of data and publication of results of the NICU
trials.

All parties will agree to accept the coordinating role of
the group and the participatory and cooperative nature of
the group process.

The support of awards pursuant to this RFA is contingent
upon ultimate receipt of appropriated funds for this
purpose.  The number of awards will be influenced by the
overall merit of the applying centers and by the amount of
funds available to the Institute.  It is anticipated that
eight to ten meritorious applications will be funded.

The specific terms, conditions, and details of arbitration
procedures pertaining to the scope and nature of the
interaction between NICHD and the participating NICUs will
be incorporated into the Notice of Grant Award.  These
procedures will be in addition to the customary programmatic
and financial negotiations which occur in the administration
of grants; they will be invoked only when agreement cannot
be reached on issues that may arise after the award between
the awardee and the NICU program officer.  In that event, an
arbitration panel will be formed consisting of one person
selected by the principal investigators, one person selected
by the Chief of the Pregnancy and Perinatology Branch, and a
third person selected by these two members.  The decision of
the arbitration panel will be binding.

The special terms of Award of Cooperative Agreement are in
addition to, and not in lieu of, otherwise applicable OMB
administrative guidelines, DHHS grant administration
regulations at 45 CFR Part 74, and other DHHS, PHS, and NIH
grant administration policies.  The NICHD review procedure
in no way affects the right of a recipient of a cooperative
agreement to appeal an adverse determination under the terms
of PHS regulations at 42 CFR Part 50, Subpart D, and DHHS
regulations at 45 CFR Part 16.  Business management aspects
of these awards will be administered by the NICHD Grants
Management Section in accordance with DHHS, PHS, and NIH
grant administration requirements.

Program staff intend that the ongoing Cooperative Agreements
will be recompeted every five years, depending on available
funds.

REVIEW CRITERIA AND PROCEDURES

A. Review Procedures

Applications that are incomplete or nonresponsive to this
RFA will be withdrawn by the Division of Research Grants and
NICHD staff upon receipt and returned to the applicants
without further consideration.  Applications that are
complete and responsive may be subjected to a preliminary
evaluation by an NICHD peer review group to determine their
scientific merit relative to the other applications received
in response to this RFA (triage); the NICHD will withdraw
from further consideration applications judged to be
noncompetitive for award and promptly notify the principal
investigator/program director and the official signing for
the applicant organization.  Those applications judged to be
competitive will be further evaluated for
scientific/technical merit by a special review committee
convened specifically for this purpose by the Scientific
Review Program, NICHD.  This review will include an
evaluation of past performance in the NICU Network for
current members followed by a second-level review by the
National Advisory Child Health and Human Development
Council.  Final selection of clinical centers for funding
also may be based on the need for diversity in the study
population.

B. Criteria for Review

Applications meeting the minimum requirements will be
evaluated on technical merit according to the criteria
listed below.

1.  Qualifications, Experience, and Commitment of Key
Personnel (see Content of Applications items #1, 2).

2.  Facilities, Clinical Population, Program (see Content of
Applications items #3, 4, 5, 6).

3.  Management, Commitment, and Experience (see Content of
Applications items #7, 8).

4.  Budget - (see Content of Applications item #9 and Budget
Guidelines - Appendix I).

METHOD OF APPLYING

Applications should be submitted on form PHS-398 (revised
10/88).  The conventional presentation format for regular
research grant applications should be used, with care taken
to address the points identified under review criteria and
eligibility for participation.

The phrase "NICU COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT APPLICATIONS, RFA
HD-90-01" should be typed in item 2 of the face page of the
application.  The RFA label included in the PHS 398 (rev.
10/88) application kit must be affixed to the bottom of the
face page.  Failure to use this label could result in
delayed processing of your application such that it may not
reach the review committee in time for review.  The original
and four copies of the application should be sent or
delivered to:

Application Receipt Office
Division of Research Grants
National Institutes of Health
Room 240, Westwood Building
Bethesda, Maryland  20892

Also send two copies to:

Laurance S. Johnston, Ph.D.
Scientific Review Program
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
Executive Plaza North, Room 520
Bethesda, MD  20892

Applications including copies must be received by May 22,
1990.  Late applications will not be accepted.

TIMETABLE

Application Receipt Date:  May 22, 1990

Initial Review Date:  June-July 1990

Review by Advisory Council:  January 1991

Anticipated Award Date:  April 1, 1991

Inquiries regarding this announcement may be directed to:

Linda L. Wright, M.D.
Special Assistant to the Director
Center for Research for Mothers and Children
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
Executive Plaza North, Room 643
Bethesda, MD  20892
Telephone:  (301) 496-5575

This program is described in the catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance No. 13.865, Research for Mothers and Children.
Awards will be made under the authority of the Public Health
Service Act, Section 301 (42 USC241), and administered under
PHS grant policies and Federal Regulations 42 CFR Part 52
and 45 CFR Part 74.  This program is not subject to review
the intergovernmental review requirements of Executive Order
12372 or Health Systems Agency Review.

APPENDIX I

BUDGET

The budget at the time of application will be limited to a
BASE BUDGET with maximum allowances as follows:

Principal/Co-Investigator component  10% effort
Co-ordinator  100% effort
Data entry clerk   50% effort
Supplies and small equipment (itemized and justified)  NTE $4,500
Travel (a total of 10 trips to Bethesda per Network research team) as
appropriate
Other costs (itemized and individually justified)  NTE $2,500

At such time as an application has been approved and is
being considered for funding, the applicant will be required
to complete protocol budgets for those studies underway
within the Network.  These budgets will consist of specific
protocol-related allowances and will be capitated on the
anticipated number of subjects to be enrolled in the study
at the applicant NICU.

Ongoing annual budgets of NICU Network members will be based
on individual protocols that will be funded through a
capitation funding.  Each NICU Network member will be given
base costs (listed above), in addition to a flat fee per
patient successfully enrolled and completed.  The individual
members will be required to project patient enrollment for a
specific protocol during a specified time frame;
continuation and level of funding will be based on actual
recruitment.


REQUEST FOR APPLICATIONS

RFA NUMBER:  90-CA-12

CLINICAL DIAGNOSTIC STUDIES OF BRAIN TUMOR USING
PET
AND OTHER IMAGING MODALITIES

P.T. 34; K.W. 0715035, 0705010, 0745020, 0706030, 0765020, 0760045

NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE

APPLICATION RECEIPT DATE:  May 18, 1990

LETTER OF INTENT RECEIPT DATE:  April 18, 1990

I.  INTRODUCTION

The Radiation Research Program (RRP), Division of Cancer
Treatment (DCT), of the National Cancer Institute (NCI),
announces the availability of a Request For Applications (RFA) on
the above program.  The objective of this RFA is to advance
diagnostic clinical research using positron emission
tomography (PET) and other modalities such
as Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS) in evaluating essential
features of brain tumor metabolism to improve our knowledge of
tumor growth, patient therapy, patient prognosis and
management.

II.  BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Advances in the last decade in imaging and imaging-related
technology have made possible not only more precise
anatomic/pathologic diagnosis but are providing functional
information as well.

These advances potentially extend the capacity of imaging method
from its customary role of anatomic diagnosis with inferred
function to observing physiologic and pathophysiologic
phenomena directly.  This trend in diagnostic imaging of combined
information is the direct result of the technological development
and clinical use of PET,
MRS, and radiolabeled monoclonal
antibodies and other imaging modalities.

PET has ideal properties for evaluating
essential features of tumor metabolism.  Such functional imaging
may be used to determine many features of malignant state,
including unrestrained growth and resistance to anti-neoplastic
therapy.  In comparison to the tissues from which they arise,
tumors have an accelerated intermediary metabolism.  This
distinction may be used as a basis for characterizing tumor
aggressiveness and response to specific anti-neoplastic therapy.
It was the consensus of a recent workshop, organized by our
program, that the time was ripe to exploit advances in
understanding of distinctive tumor metabolism, and the
technology of PET, to develop clinically useful analytic methods
for assessing regional glucose metabolism, protein synthesis, and
DNA synthesis.  Based on presentations at the workshop and
successful studies at the NIH for brain tumors, it appears that
PET studies of the metabolism of other tumors are likely to
result in improved knowledge of tumor aggressiveness and
patient prognosis.  Furthermore, PET is a useful modality for
studies on response to radio- and chemo-therapy, on choice of
optimal site of tumor biopsy, and on distinguishing between local
invasion and the response of normal tissue.  These studies may
improve surgical treatment planning of cancer patients.

Similarly, recent research using MRS
in vivo evaluating normal and malignant tissues
shows the capability of this modality to provide functional
information and identify various metabolites and meaningful
metabolic data for patient managements.  Features such as PH,
the tissue redox state and useful information derived from
regional perfusion may be determined by MRS.  These and other
physiological approaches using MRS can be used to monitor
therapeutic response during regional perfusion of malignant
tumors in man.  Based on successes of PET, MRS, and other
modalities in providing significant functional information derived
from normal and malignant tissues in vivo, clinical study of brain
tumor metabolism becomes not only possible but timely.

III.  RESEARCH GOALS AND SCOPE

The overall objective of this RFA is to advance the use of PET,
MRS, radiolabeled monoclonal antibodies and other modalities to
evaluate essential features of brain tumor metabolism, to
improve our knowledge of tumor growth, to determine effects of
therapy, and patient prognosis and management.  Stated in other
words, the aim of this RFA is to improve our understanding of
pathophysiology of brain function in patients with primary brain
tumors using PET and other radiographic methods at diagnosis,
during and after the course of therapy.

Where feasible and appropriate applications for the proposed
clinical studies should include a suitable representation of
minorities and women.  If the applicant cannot comply, a clear
rationale for their exclusion must be provided.

IV.  MECHANISM OF SUPPORT

Support of this program will be through the National Institutes of
Health (NIH) Grant-in-Aid (RO1) Agreement.  Applicants will be
responsible for the planning, direction, and execution of the
proposed project.  Except as otherwise stated in this RFA, awards
will be administered under PHS grants policy as stated in the
Public Health Service Grants Policy Statement, DHHS Publication
No. (OASH) 82-50,000, revised January 1, 1987.

This RFA is a one-time solicitation.  Generally, future unsolicited
competitive continuation applications will compete as research
project applications with all other investigator-initiated
applications and be reviewed by the Division of Research Grants
(DRG).  However, should the NCI determine that there is sufficient
programatic need, a request for renewal applications will be
announced.  In that event, only the recipients of awards under the
RFA will be eligible to apply.

Approximately $900,000 in total costs per year for five years
will be committed specifically to fund applications that are
submitted in response to this RFA.
The funding level is dependent on the
receipt of a sufficient number of applications of high scientific
merit.  The total project period for applications submitted in
response to the present RFA should not exceed five years.  The
earliest feasible start date for the initial awards will be
September 1990.  Although this program is provided for in the
financial plans of the NCI, the award of grants pursuant to this
RFA is also contingent upon the availability of funds for this
purpose.

V.  ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS

Non-profit and for-profit organizations and institutions,
governments and their agencies, and foreign institutions are
eligible to apply.  All applications need to have the personnel,
equipment, facilities, and brain tumor patients in order to
conduct the research outlined in item IV.  In order to participate
in this program, applicant institutions must demonstrate, or meet
the following requirements:

A.  Availability of PET facility and personnel capable to conduct
PET research on patients with brain tumors.  This includes:
metabolism, flow permeability and/or receptors, and other
investigations as designed by the applicant.

B.  Other approaches using MRS, radiolabeled antibodies and other
radiographic methods need to have the necessary equipment,
facilities, personnel to conduct the proposed research on brain
tumors.

C.  Applicants must demonstrate the availability of an anatomic
imaging facility.

D.  A multidisciplinary team such as nuclear medicine, radiology,
radiation oncology, neuroradiology, oncology, and pathology is
minimally required to conduct this research.

E.  An adequate number of brain tumor patients needed for this
investigation is essential for this project.

F.  Applicants must document their ability to evaluate precisely
the progression and regression of brain tumors.

VI.  REVIEW PROCEDURES AND CRITERIA

A.  REVIEW PROCEDURE

Upon receipt, applications will be reviewed by applying DRG
referral guidelines and will be reviewed initially by the Division
of Research Grants (DRG) for completeness.  Incomplete
applications will be returned to the applicant without further
consideration.  Evaluation for responsiveness to the program
requirements and criteria stated in the RFA is an NCI program
staff function.  Applications that are judged non-responsive
will be returned by the NCI, but may be submitted by the applicant
as investigator-initiated regular research grants at the next
receipt date.

In cases where the number of applications is large compared to
the number of awards to be made, the NCI may conduct a
preliminary scientific peer review to eliminate those which are
clearly not competitive.  The NCI will remove from competition
those applications judged to be noncompetitive for an award and
notify the applicant and institutional business official.

Those applications judged to be both competitive and responsive
will be further evaluated according to the review criteria stated
below for scientific and technical merit by an appropriate peer
review group convened by the Division of Extramural Activities,
NCI.  The second level of review by the National Cancer Advisory
Board considers the special needs of the Institute and the
priorities of the National Cancer Program.

B.  REVIEW CRITERIA

The NCI peer review will consider the following criteria:

1.  Significance of the proposed research to the overall goals of
the RFA, namely, to utilize imaging modalities to understand
better the biology and pathobiology of brain tumor progression in
relation to brain function of patients with primary brain tumors
in a manner that leads to better patient management.

2.  Originality, scientific and technical merit of the proposed
research approach.

3.  Competence, experience and ability of the principal
investigator and the research team to accomplish the objectives
of the overall goals of the RFA.

4.  Accuracy and adequacy of the methods, procedures and
approaches for the use of the PET and other modalities in brain
tumors imaging.

5.  Appropriateness and adequacy of the facilities, resources,
instrumentation and equipment available to the principal
investigator and supporting staff.

6.  Evidence of the ability to accrue adequate number of patients
with primary brain tumors.

7.  Reasonableness of the time/effort devoted by the applicant
and his staff to the project.

The budget shall not be considered as a review criterion and will
be determined after the scientific merit evaluation.  Based on the
actual budgetary needs for the conduct of the approved research,
the review group will recommend an appropriate budget and
period of support for each approved application.

VII.  METHOD OF APPLICATION

The regular research grant application form PHS-398 (revised
10/88) must be used in applying for this RFA.  These forms are
available at most institutional business offices and from the
Office of Grants Inquiries, Division of Research Grants, National
Institutes of Health, Room 449, Westwood Building, 5333
Westbard Avenue, Bethesda, Maryland  20892, or from the NCI
program director named below.

The RFA label available in the 10/88 revision of application Form
398 must be affixed to the bottom of the face page.  Failure to
use this label could result in delayed processing of your
application such that it may not reach the review committee in
time for review.  In addition, the RFA number and title should be
typed on line 2 of the face page of the application form.

Submit a signed, typewritten original of the application,
including the Checklist, and four (4) signed, exact photocopies, in
one package to DRG at the address below.  The photocopies
must be clear and single sided.

DIVISION OF RESEARCH GRANTS
National Institutes of Health
Westwood Building, Room 240
Bethesda, MD  20892**

At time of submission, send two (2) additional copies of the
application to:

REFERRAL OFFICER
Division of Extramural Activities
National Cancer Institute
Room 848, Westwood Building
5333 Westbard Avenue
Bethesda, MD  20892

Applications must be received by May 18, 1990.  If an application is
received after that date, it will be returned.  Also, the DRG will
not accept any application in response to this announcement that
is the same as one currently being considered by any other review
group of NIH awarding unit.

VIII.  LETTER OF INTENT

Prospective applicants are asked to submit, by April 18, 1990, a letter
of intent that includes a descriptive title of the proposed
research, the name and address of the principal investigator, the
names of other key personnel, the participating institutions, and
the number and title of the RFA in response to which the
application is being submitted.  The letter of intent is of great
benefit to the NCI in planning for and implementing the review
process although it is not required, is not binding, and does not
enter into the review of subsequent applications.

The letter of intent should be sent to the NCI program director:

Dr. Matti Al-Aish, Acting Chief
Diagnostic Imaging Research Branch
Radiation Research Program
National Cancer Institute
National Institutes of Health
Executive Plaza North, Suite 800
Bethesda, MD  20892
Telephone:  (301) 496-9531

IX.  INQUIRIES

Written or telephone inquiries concerning the objectives and
scope of this RFA or inquiries about whether or not specific
proposed research would be responsive are encouraged and should
be directed to Dr. Matti Al-Aish at the above address.  The
program director welcomes the opportunity to clarify any issues
or questions from potential applicants.

This program is described in the Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance No. 13.395, Cancer Treatment Research.  Awards are under
the authority of Public Health Service Act, Title IV, Part A (Public
Law 78-410, as amended by Public Law 99-158, 42 USC 241 and 285) and
administered under PHS grant policies and Federal Regulations 42 CFR
Part 52 and 45 CFR Part 74.  This program is not subject to the
intergovernmental review requirements of Executive Order 12372 or
Health Systems Agency review.