1. Assessment of the International Cancer Research Partnership lung cancer portfolio
Samantha Finstad, Ph.D.*
National Cancer Institute
Lynne Davies, Ph.D.
Cancer Research UK
International Cancer Research Partnership
Mission
Currently at Defense and Veterans Brain Injury Center

2. Abstract
Lung cancer is the most common type of cancer worldwide, and estimated to be responsible for one in five cancer deaths. Many factors impact lung cancer development, including exposure to tobacco smoking, and other environmental and occupational exposures. The International Cancer Research Partnership (ICRP) is in a unique position to assess the global cancer research landscape related to lung cancer. This portfolio analysis of lung cancer research funded by ICRP organizations employs techniques refined via the other analyses presented in this session, such as the automated approach for the translational research analysis and the keyword-matching used in the breast cancer analyses, as well as a custom manual-coding schema. By using a multi-method approach we will be able to gain understanding of the lung cancer research portfolio as well as identify potential gaps and areas of growth within the global lung cancer research portfolio represented by ICRP partners.
Mission

3. Why look at lung cancer? Background Why analyze lung cancer?
One of the most common cancers worldwide
Large % is preventable through tobacco cessation
Although % of population that smokes has been falling in many developed countries, along with % incidence and % mortality,1 the health and economic impact of lung cancer on health care budgets is still significant and improved treatments are necessary. 10 year survival rates in lung cancer amongst the lowest of the common cancers.2
Important to track trends in research to understand
How research efforts shift in response to new discoveries
Whether or not basic research is being translated into clinical / patient benefit
What molecular targets are being pursued for treatment
(1)
(2)

4. Lung cancer in the ICRP database
Large repository of cancer research grants
Over 75,000 current and historical grants covering 2000 – date
Includes many of the world’s major research funders
Estimated to include a minimum of 65% of global non-pharma cancer research
Methodology for identifying and analyzing lung cancer: using in-built classifications
Multifaceted approach to identify the right awards and analyze
Used built-in cancer site classifications to find lung cancer over the period 2005 – 2012
5559 grants – approx 9% of the total awards in this period
Lung cancer is about 13% of the global cancer burden (incidence)
Survival rates are amongst the lowest
Analysis using the CSO allows understanding of trends in biology, etiology, prevention, treatment etc.
65% comes from analyses of combination of Web of Science funder data – a very rough analysis done in the following way using # of publications as a proxy indicator of funding level.
average # of all oncology papers over 5 years (boolean search on topics), removing obvious large pharma companies (by NOT phrases in Funding agency field)
Same search, but with boolean search for all known variants of funding agencies that are partners (NIH, NCI, National Cancer Institute, ACS, American Cancer Society etc.)
Analysis using known spend of identified world agencies (ICRP cancer catalogue) suggests that ICRP is around 70% of world cancer funding.
(1)
(2)

5. Visualizing shifts in research focus
Mission
Trends
Prevention efforts fairly static
Big increase in biology – likely due to new models for earlier stages of the disease becoming available.
Increases too in detection/diagnosis and treatment

6. Tracking translational research
Methodology for identifying and analyzing lung cancer: complementing the classification system with in-depth analysis
(1) Translational research
Specific CSO sub-codes associated with basic, translational, clinical, for example
Mission

7. Lung cancer subtypes
Methodology for identifying and analyzing lung cancer: complementing the classification system with in-depth analysis
Used keywording methodology with abstracts to identify the lung cancer sub-types studied:
Samantha: have simplified chart here to improve it (I put any coded to multiple categories e.g., NSCLC and SCLC, in one batch). I tried a multi-category Venn, but it was way too complicated and hard to read!
Data Limitation
Not all projects mention specific cancer types

8. Lung cancer: molecular targets
Methodology for identifying and analyzing lung cancer: complementing the classification system with in-depth analysis
Used keywording methodology with abstracts to identify
Molecular targets
Challenges
Current system uses automation for known targets
Dependent on standard spellings for genes / proteins (not always the case!)
Identifying new targets requires manual intervention
New methods
Looking at automated matching of gene/ protein ontologies against abstracts to cover a wider range of targets
[Collaboration with Sagebase]
Nature Genetics (

9. Impact of data: changing strategy / outcomes
Previous analyses of lung cancer using the ICRP’s cancer type and CSO classification systems have led to several initiatives
Examples:
UK: Lung cancer Supportive and Palliative Care research grants
A UK-wide analysis of the lung cancer portfolio identified a lack of research in supportive and palliative care
Government and non-profit organization co-funded 9 research grants to address this gap area: for example
Dr Matthew K Makin, The Marie Curie Palliative Care Institute Liverpool The role of cordotomy in the management of mesothelioma-related pain in the United Kingdom (The INPIC Pilot study) (Invasive Procedures In Cancer Pain)
Dr Mary O’Brien, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London Randomised Evaluation of STents to Open REstricted AIRways in patients with centrally placed non-small cell lung cancer (RESTORE – AIR)
Mission

10. Acknowledgements ICRP Partner Organizations ICRP Evaluation Committee
Mission