As Trump Cuts Cancer Research Funding, Billionaire Sean Parker Wants To Scale It Up
AFP via Getty Images
Of all the cuts the Trump Administration has made, its attacks on medical research are some of the most baffling, threatening the ability for American scientists to keep developing new medicines to treat everything from cancer to Parkinson's.
For billionaire Sean Parker, who told Forbes he's been heavily involved in lobbying to boost federal spending on medical research, that means philanthropies and the private sector will have to step in to fill some of the gap.
'We've seen this incredible, historic, unprecedented retreat from public funding,' Parker, 45, told Forbes. 'Which is really the engine that fuels the single most productive biotech innovation economy in the world.'
In this environment, he also sees a bigger role for the Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy (PICI), a philanthropic organization he founded nearly a decade ago with a $250 million grant that funds cancer research. It also invests in biotech companies turning that research into drugs. Parker poured in another $125 million in 2024, and said he's committed more funds towards the next round of grant funding, though he didn't disclose the amount.
To date, PICI has spent over $300 million on nearly 500 academic projects that have resulted in the publication of over 4,000 papers and over 300 patents, largely focused on cancer immunotherapies — drugs that assist the body's own immune system to fight cancers. Seventeen biotech companies have spun up based on this research, collectively raising over $4 billion in venture capital (which includes funds that PICI has invested). PICI has conducted six clinical trials to test cancer treatments, including one that improved survival in pancreatic cancer patients, and its portfolio companies have 50 in various stages.
'In a world where [public] funding is being reduced, we are likely to see the more ambitious, interesting projects going unfunded because a simple, easy to understand project tends to be less risky,' he said. That's where PICI can step in.
PICI's new CEO Karen Knudsen
PICI
As part of its effort, PICI announced that it's appointing former American Cancer Society CEO Karen Knudsen as its new chief executive in order to 'take the organization to the next level' and scale up its operations, Parker said. Knudsen, a cancer researcher who has a PhD in molecular biology, previously founded the Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center's prostate cancer program and led its cancer care programs as enterprise director. During her three-year tenure leading the American Cancer Society, the organization more than doubled the research grants it awarded. As CEO of PICI, she will oversee the institute's partnerships with multiple universities and cancer centers, including Stanford, the University of Pennsylvania, UCLA and others, as well as PICI's investments in biotech companies.
As federal research funding is cut back, 'the level of risk tolerance shrinks,' Knudsen told Forbes. That leaves more ambitious projects in the lurch.
But PICI has a flexible model, which was part of the appeal for Knudsen. The organization is able to quickly react to changes impacting the research landscape. For example, if the organization determined that a technology is 'absolutely critical and going to be the most game changing for cancer patients and it's not moving forward in another way,' PICI will shift more resources towards it, she said.
InnovationRx is your weekly digest of healthcare news. To get it in your inbox every Wednesday, subscribe here.
Among the startups PICI has backed so far are Arsenal Bio, which most recently raised a $325 million series C round that valued the company at $1.85 billion, according to Pitchbook. It is currently testing its cell therapies against kidney cancer and ovarian cancer on humans, and plans to begin trials for prostate cancer later this year. Another is Georgiamune, which has already begun clinical trials for a treatment targeting advanced metastatic cancers after it launched with a $75 million series A in August 2023.
The work with startups is particularly important right now, Parker said, because biotech investments are declining as venture investors deal 'with a public equities market where there's very little interest in biotech.' The investments that do happen are largely for companies that are already in later stages with products well along the development path.
While both Parker and Knudsen are adamant that their organization can't replace public funding, they think they can move science forward by backing bolder projects as governments and markets become more risk-averse.
'These are precisely the intensive market conditions which we're designed to weather or help others weather,' Parker said. 'It gives me a lot of motivation to continue doing what we're doing and double down on it.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
22 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Triumphant in trade talks, Trump and his tariffs still face a challenge in federal court
In May, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of International Trade, a specialized federal court in New York, ruled that Trump exceeded his powers when he declared a national emergency to plaster taxes — tariffs — on imports from almost every country in the world. In reaching its decision, the court combined two challenges — one by five businesses and one by 12 U.S. states — into a single case. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Now it goes on to Round Two. Advertisement On Thursday, the 11 judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, which typically specializes in patent law, are scheduled to hear oral arguments from the Trump administration and from the states and businesses that want his sweeping import taxes struck down. That court earlier allowed the federal government to continue collecting Trump's tariffs as the case works its way through the judicial system. The issues are so weighty — involving the president's power to bypass Congress and impose taxes with huge economic consequences in the United States and abroad — that the case is widely expected to reach the U.S. Supreme Court, regardless of what the appeals court decides. Advertisement Trump is an unabashed fan of tariffs. He sees the import taxes as an all-purpose economic tool that can bring manufacturing back to the United States, protect American industries, raise revenue to pay for the massive tax cuts in his 'One Big Beautiful Bill,'' pressure countries into bending to his will, even end wars. The U.S. Constitution gives the power to impose taxes — including tariffs — to Congress. But lawmakers have gradually relinquished power over trade policy to the White House. And Trump has made the most of the power vacuum, raising the average U.S. tariff to more than 18%, highest since 1934, according to the Budget Lab at Yale University. At issue in the pending court case is Trump's use of the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose sweeping tariffs without seeking congressional approval or conducting investigations first. Instead, he asserted the authority to declare a national emergency that justified his import taxes. In February, he cited the illegal flow of drugs and immigrants across the U.S. border to slap tariffs on Canada, China and Mexico. Then on April 2 — 'Liberation Day,'' Trump called it — he invoked IEEPA to announce 'reciprocal'' tariffs of up to 50% on countries with which the United States ran trade deficits and a 10% 'baseline'' tariff on almost everybody else. The emergency he cited was America's long-running trade deficit. Trump later suspended the reciprocal tariffs, but they remain a threat: They could be imposed again Friday on countries that do not pre-empt them by reaching trade agreements with the United States or that receive letters from Trump setting their tariff rates himself. Advertisement The plaintiffs argue that the emergency power laws does not authorize the use of tariffs. They also note that the trade deficit hardly meets the definition of an 'unusual and extraordinary'' threat that would justify declaring an emergency under the law. The United States, after all, has run trade deficits — in which it buys more from foreign countries than it sells them — for 49 straight years and in good times and bad. The Trump administration argues that courts approved President Richard Nixon's emergency use of tariffs in a 1971 economic crisis. The Nixon administration successfully cited its authority under the 1917 Trading With Enemy Act, which preceded and supplied some of the legal language used in IEEPA. In May, the trade court rejected the argument, ruling that Trump's Liberation Day tariffs 'exceed any authority granted to the President'' under the emergency powers law. 'The president doesn't get to use open-ended grants of authority to do what he wants,'' said Reilly Stephens, senior counsel at the Liberty Justice Center, a libertarian legal group that is representing businesses suing the Trump administration over the tariffs. In the case of the drug trafficking and immigration tariffs on Canada, China and Mexico, the trade court ruled that the levies did not meet IEEPA's requirement that they 'deal with'' the problem they were supposed to address. The court challenge does not cover other Trump tariffs, including levies on foreign steel, aluminum and autos that the president imposed after Commerce Department investigations concluded that those imports were threats to U.S. national security. Nor does it include tariffs that Trump imposed on China in his first term — and President Joe Biden kept — after a government investigation concluded that the Chinese used unfair practices to give their own technology firms an edge over rivals from the United States and other Western countries. Advertisement
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Trump suspends de minimis exemption for low-value imports
President Trump on Wednesday signed an executive order suspending what's known as a de minimis exemption allowing low-value parcels that are shipped to the United States to avoid tariffs. The White House said it's closing what it called a "catastrophic loophole" that shippers use to "evade tariffs and funnel deadly synthetic opioids or below-market products" into the U.S. The order goes into effect Aug. 29. The exemption had applied to parcels valued at $800 or less, and allowed overseas retailers to ship inexpensive goods to consumers in the U.S. tax-free. "President Trump is putting an end to the proliferation of shippers worldwide that, among other things, deceptively exploit the de minimis privilege in an effort to evade duties, inspection, and U.S. law," the White House said in a fact sheet outlining the new policy. Mr. Trump in May ended the de minimis loophole for imports from China and Hong Kong, which had allowed retailers like Shein and Temu to ship ultra low-cost apparel and other goods to U.S.-based consumers at bargain-basement prices. Shipments from China and Hong Kong account for most de minimis shipments to the U.S. according to the White House. The de minimis provision, which was added to the Tariff Act of 1930 several years after that law's passage, was intended to facilitate trade by eliminating the administrative burden of collecting modest import duties on low-cost goods. The number of low-value parcels entering the U.S. has surged over the past decade. Between 2015 and 2025, that figure jumped from 134 million shipments per year to nearly 1.4 billion. Customs and Border Patrol processes more than 4 million de minimis shipments to the U.S. daily, according to the White House. Retailers such as Shein and Temu were forced to scramble when the loophole for imports from China and Hong Kong was suspended earlier this year. China-based Temu halted shipments of Chinese goods to American customers and shifted to only selling products to U.S. shoppers that could be sourced from the company's U.S. warehouses. Watch: Hawaii Gov. Josh Green gives update on tsunami warning Forensics expert analysis of Jeffrey Epstein jail video contradicts government's claims Russia reacts to Trump's new deadline on Ukraine ceasefire
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Trump strikes trade deal with South Korea, hits U.S ally with 15% tariff
WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump said he struck a trade deal with South Korea that would involve investments in the United States, the purchase of liquified natural gas and a 15% tariff on imports. America will not be charged a corresponding tariff by South Korea, he said in a social media post. Trump announced the agreement on Truth Social, as well as an August visit to the White House by South Korean leader Lee Jae Myung. More: Trump says 25% tariffs coming for Japan and South Korea as trade war escalates again "The Deal is that South Korea will give to the United States $350 Billion Dollars for Investments owned and controlled by the United States, and selected by myself, as President," Trump wrote. Trump said South Korea had also committed to purchasing $100 billion of LNG and other energy products from the U.S. and pledged to invest another "large sum of money" that would be revealed during Lee's upcoming visit. "It is also agreed that South Korea will be completely OPEN TO TRADE with the United States, and that they will accept American product including Cars and Trucks, Agriculture, etc," Trump said. Trump had threated to put a 25% tariff on South Korea in a letter to Lee in early July. It would have went into effect on Aug. 1 without a trade deal or a reprieve. In another post, Trump said he had also come to an agreement with Pakistan, "whereby Pakistan and the United States will work together on developing their massive Oil Reserves." He said the nations were in the process of selecting an oil company to lead the partnership. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Trump strikes trade deal with South Korea, including 15% tariff Sign in to access your portfolio
