Medical researchers baffled by Trump administration's stop work order for clinical trial system: ‘A giant step backwards'
A national initiative used by 1,350 universities and academic medical centers to allow urgent clinical trials to move forward with speed, efficiency, and proper oversight has been handed a stop work order from the Trump administration. The move threatens to delay thousands of human studies on everything from cancer to dementia.
'We were told to cease all work…immediately,' an April 22 statement on its website reads, in part. 'The order did not include a reason or explanation.'
The stop work order came around the same time that other orders—ending contracts on grants looking into conditions ranging from ALS to acute radiation syndrome—began rolling into Harvard. That was just hours after Harvard rejected government demands that included changes to governance and hiring practices and 'audits' of viewpoints, noted the Harvard Gazette.
Of the stop work order, Dr. Barbara Bieber, director of the system known as the SMART IRB (streamlined, multisite, accelerated resources for trials institutional review board), tells Fortune, 'People were really shocked. We were, I have to say, not anticipating this at all.'
The system, funded by a $2 million annual federal contract from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), was created by researchers at Harvard University 15 years ago to tackle two issues: to ensure proper protections for the human patients participating in large clinical trials, and to make sure those oversights did not slow down the study from getting underway. Typically, without the SMART IRB, it could take many months to get a large clinical study up and running; with the system in place, it can happen as quickly as within 20 minutes.
'We want to bring new treatments to people that need them as quickly as possible,' says Bieber. In a not-yet-published op-ed shared with Fortune, she wrote of the stop work order, "We had taken 15 years to build what was destroyed with a single email, halting vital research across the country."
Plus, Bieber told the Gazette, "Studies halted midstream risk significant harms to participants and communities and can reinforce public skepticism and mistrust for the research enterprise and inhibit the commitment of researchers and institutions to fully, honestly, and collaboratively work with the communities they serve."
At the height of the pandemic, the SMART IRB enabled more than 300 COVID studies to quickly get off the ground.
'The numbers are remarkable considering that when the COVID-19 pandemic began, science and medicine needed to pivot at lightning speed to meet the challenge, and that's not something biomedical science is known for, especially when it comes to translating hot-off-the-bench scientific discoveries into evidence-based clinical tools at the bedside,' explained a 2023 news release of the Harvard Medical School.
One big obstacle when it comes to multisite clinical trials getting underway quickly is that institutional review boards (IRBs) must take due diligence to make sure human research participants are protected, a process that could take nine months or longer. 'But at the height of the pandemic,' the news release notes, 'the science needed to advance knowledge of SARS-CoV-2 couldn't wait that long.' Luckily, the SMART IRB meant it didn't have to.
But now, because of the inexplicable stop work order, says Bieber, 'instead of a coordinated system that advances research, we are taking a giant step backward and compromising the research to improve the health of all Americans.'
It's further baffling, she says, as 'the people that we work with at NIH have been the best collaborators you can imagine. They're responsive, they're helpful. They took over the IT side of this, because they could do it more effectively and integrate it with other systems that they have going…They were very enthusiastic about this and, you'd have to speak to them, but I think equally surprised.'
The NIH responded to Fortune's request for comment simply by noting, 'In accordance with the Presidential Memo 'Radical Transparency About Wasteful Spending,' information on NIH's terminated grants may be accessed through this website,' also including a link to a chart of all grants terminated thus far.
In the meantime, as the system itself remains available, Bieber says employees of Harvard—which doesn't own the collaborative system, but administers it—have been volunteering to keep it going, answering help desk questions and just assisting researchers move through the SMART IRB process to keep trials up and running. Though it's uncertain how long they'll be able to keep it up.
'What the Trump administration says it wants to do is to make the government more efficient, and get rid of challenges that don't necessarily improve the lives of Americans,' Bieber says. 'And this really does that. It takes away these months of delays.'
More on medical research:
Walk this way for a healthy heart, says study
RFK Jr. warns seed oils are poisoning Americans, and a new study shows a possible link to cancer
The 4 foods that science says can help you live to 100
This story was originally featured on Fortune.com
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
No drug price pledges in talks with US government, Pfizer CEO says
STORY: Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said Monday that he and other drug companies met with the Trump administration to discuss lowering U.S. drug prices but no commitments have been made. He made the comments at a Goldman Sachs healthcare conference. Last month President Trump issued an executive order directing drugmakers to lower the prices of their medicines to align with what other countries pay. According to the order, the administration was to set "Most Favored Nation" price targets within 30 days. The Department of Health and Human Services has said it expects drugmakers in the U.S. to set prices for their products at the lowest price paid by other high-income countries. Bourla said he didn't know what the companies would hear in 30 days and added the meetings with the administration so far were cordial but (quote) "not digging into the substance." It is unclear what mechanism the U.S. government will use to lower drug prices - analysts and legal experts have said the policy will be difficult to implement. Bourla said he is hopeful that, given U.S. pressure on European countries to pay more, prices there could increase. He said that if the U.S. resorts to price controls, Pfizer could consider not making drugs available for government reimbursement in some countries if prices don't increase there. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
In letter, more than 300 scientists rebuke Trump research cuts, NIH director
June 9 (UPI) -- Hundreds of scientists via the National Institute of Health signed a published letter in protest to NIH leadership and recent cuts by the Trump administration. "We are compelled to speak up when our leadership prioritizes political moment over human safety and faithful stewardship of public resources," more than 300 scientists wrote Monday to NIH Director Jay Bhattacharya in a so-called "Bethesda Declaration" published by Stand Up For Science in rebuke to Trump administration research funding cuts and staff layoffs. They added in the letter to U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and members of Congress overseeing NIH that they "dissent" to Trump's policies that "undermine" the NIH mission, "waste" public resources and harm "the health of Americans and people across the globe." In the open letter, they said the current endeavor to "Make America Healthy Again" referred to "some undefined time in the past." "Keeping NIH at the forefront of biomedical research requires our stalwart commitment to continuous improvement," the letter's writers said, adding that the life-and-death nature of NIH work "demands that changes be thoughtful and vetted." According to the letter, the Trump administration terminated at least 2,100 NIH research grants since January, totaling around $9.5 billion and contracts representing some $2.6 billion in new research. "We urge you as NIH Director to restore grants delayed or terminated for political reasons so that life-saving science can continue," the letter added in part. "This undercuts long-standing NIH policies designed to maximize return on investment by working with grantees to address concerns and complete studies," it said. It further accused the White House of creating a "culture of fear and suppression" among NIH researchers. Bhattacharya, a Stanford University professor and health researcher, called the agency the "crown jewel of American biomedical sciences" and said he had the "utmost respect" for its scientists and mission during his confirmation hearing in March. On Tuesday, Bhattacharya is scheduled to testify before the Senate's Appropriations Committee on Trump's 2026 NIH budget proposal which seeks to cut roughly 40% of NIH's $48 billion budget. "This spending slowdown reflects a failure of your legal duty to use congressionally-appropriated funds for critical NIH research," the scientists penned to Bhattacharya. The letter goes on to characterize it as "dissent" from Trump administration policy, quoting Bhattacharya during his confirmation as saying "dissent is the very essence of science." "Standing up in this way is a risk, but I am much more worried about the risks of not speaking up," says Jenna Norton, a program officer at the NIH's National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. "If we don't speak up, we allow continued harm to research participants and public health in America and across the globe," Norton said in a statement, adding that if others don't speak up, "we allow our government to curtail free speech, a fundamental American value."
UPI
an hour ago
- UPI
In letter, more than 300 scientists rebuke Trump research cuts, NIH director
June 9 (UPI) -- Hundreds of scientists via the National Institute of Health signed a published letter in protest to NIH leadership and recent cuts by the Trump administration. "We are compelled to speak up when our leadership prioritizes political moment over human safety and faithful stewardship of public resources," more than 300 scientists wrote Monday to NIH Director Jay Bhattacharya in a so-called "Bethesda Declaration" published by Stand Up For Science in rebuke to Trump administration research funding cuts and staff layoffs. They added in the letter to U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and members of Congress overseeing NIH that they "dissent" to Trump's policies that "undermine" the NIH mission, "waste" public resources and harm "the health of Americans and people across the globe." In the open letter, they said the current endeavor to "Make America Healthy Again" referred to "some undefined time in the past." "Keeping NIH at the forefront of biomedical research requires our stalwart commitment to continuous improvement," the letter's writers said, adding that the life-and-death nature of NIH work "demands that changes be thoughtful and vetted." According to the letter, the Trump administration terminated at least 2,100 NIH research grants since January, totaling around $9.5 billion and contracts representing some $2.6 billion in new research. "We urge you as NIH Director to restore grants delayed or terminated for political reasons so that life-saving science can continue," the letter added in part. "This undercuts long-standing NIH policies designed to maximize return on investment by working with grantees to address concerns and complete studies," it said. It further accused the White House of creating a "culture of fear and suppression" among NIH researchers. Bhattacharya, a Stanford University professor and health researcher, called the agency the "crown jewel of American biomedical sciences" and said he had the "utmost respect" for its scientists and mission during his confirmation hearing in March. On Tuesday, Bhattacharya is scheduled to testify before the Senate's Appropriations Committee on Trump's 2026 NIH budget proposal which seeks to cut roughly 40% of NIH's $48 billion budget. "This spending slowdown reflects a failure of your legal duty to use congressionally-appropriated funds for critical NIH research," the scientists penned to Bhattacharya. The letter goes on to characterize it as "dissent" from Trump administration policy, quoting Bhattacharya during his confirmation as saying "dissent is the very essence of science." "Standing up in this way is a risk, but I am much more worried about the risks of not speaking up," says Jenna Norton, a program officer at the NIH's National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. "If we don't speak up, we allow continued harm to research participants and public health in America and across the globe," Norton said in a statement, adding that if others don't speak up, "we allow our government to curtail free speech, a fundamental American value."
