PCORI's Cycle II Awards: Another Big Step Toward Answering the Questions that Matter Most to Patients

We've been taking a closer look in the last couple of weeks at the latest round of primary research awards that PCORI's Board of Governors approved at its last meeting, and we're excited by what we see. It's another sign of our rapid growth as a leading funder of patient-centered comparative effectiveness research (CER).

The 51 projects we selected – totaling $88.6 million – amounts to more than double what we funded in our first cycle late last year. It is a substantial boost for our growing portfolio of patient-centered outcomes research studies designed to answer questions faced by patients and other healthcare decision makers. It indicates to us that applicants are understanding better our requirements for patient-centeredness and appropriate engagement of patients and other stakeholders in their work.

These newest projects address a range of conditions that affect tens of millions of Americans across populations and geography. They add to a growing portfolio of research that is responsive to the mandate in our authorizing legislation to prioritize our work on the basis of the burden of various illnesses. But it does so not by precertifying the conditions we'll study. Instead, we pick the best proposals, demonstrating that the research community also tends to prioritize these conditions highly. We recognize that an additional part of our mandate is to work closely with our research teams to pull together and synthesize findings across projects within particular areas.

A Promising Portfolio of Patient-Centered CER

For patients and those who care for them, this research offers the prospect of useful new information on how to best care for people with kidney disease, certain cancers, obesity, asthma, diabetes, various neurological conditions, mental health and substance abuse disorders, and trauma. A number of projects explore ways to inform and facilitate shared decision-making by patients and clinicians, reduce specific health disparities, and improve healthcare delivery systems.

We’ve worked diligently to engage researchers and others across the healthcare community to help them understand what we’re looking for in research proposals. The growing volume of proposals we’ve received that are both scientifically rigorous and meet our criteria for patient-centeredness suggests that we’re making progress in those efforts and leaves us optimistic about future funding cycles.

We continue to see high-quality and innovative applications from across the country. We funded projects in 21 states this time around, bringing the total number across our first two cycles to 33, plus Washington, D.C. We also continue to receive proposals that address the needs of a variety of populations. This cycle, for example, features 23 projects that focus on ethnic or racial minorities, and 15 that study health issues in rural settings, a topic emphasized in our authorizing legislation.

As with our inaugural funding cycle last year, each application for funding we received in this latest round was carefully evaluated by a diverse group of reviewers based on the scientific merit of the proposed study, its relevance to patients and other key stakeholders, the likelihood that findings may change current practice and improve outcomes, the engagement of patients and stakeholders, and the proposed study’s fit within our National Priorities for Research. As a result, we’re confident that we’re funding the best and most well-rounded proposals from the 400-plus submissions we received.

The addition of these latest awards means we have approved 76 studies totaling $129.3 million through the first two cycles of our broad PCORI Funding Announcements (PFAs). Our research portfolio now contains studies of over 20 different categories of health conditions, including cancer, mental health disorders and cardiovascular diseases. These projects address many of the nation's most vulnerable populations; racial or ethnic minorities, the elderly and rural residents are the most commonly studied groups.

Each of these projects was funded because our staff, Board of Governors, and reviewers believe patients and those who care for them will benefit from the information the studies will produce. We look forward to approving many more projects in our next cycles of funding. These will be announced later this year, in September and December.

Looking Ahead

As we begin to review the third cycle of applications and prepare to release the fourth set of funding announcements, let me take a moment to thank all of those who have submitted proposals to us. For those who have been unsuccessful so far, we strongly encourage you to apply for one of the many future funding opportunities we’ll offer. And for those whose projects were approved, we look forward to your progress in changing the CER landscape in this country.

I particularly wish to acknowledge the contributions of many reviewers -- scientists, patients, clinicians, and policymakers -- who spent numerous hours reviewing applications at home and then traveled to Baltimore for an intensive day of discussion and ranking, and to the scientists who chaired these review panels. We truly appreciate the care and thoughtfulness put into these reviews and the efficient, collaborative way in which panels worked together.

With your continued support, we can build a rich portfolio of patient-centered CER that will provide the information patients and those who care for them need to make better- informed healthcare decisions.

At the point that this blog was published, Michael R. Dueñas was PCORI's Director of Contracts Management.