The NIH Faculty Institutional Recruitment for Sustainable Transformation (FIRST) Program

This message was authored in collaboration with leadership from across NIH. Director’s messages written solely by Dr. Gordon that focus on addressing disparities and increasing diversity in the research  community include: Racism and Mental Health Research: Steps Toward Equity; Confronting Bias to Advance Science; and From Student to Scientist: NIMH Training and Career Development.

Inherent in the mission of NIH is that biomedical research and its application can and should benefit all people. Significant events across our nation over the past year and frank discussions in the research community have led to deep reflection at NIH about biases and disparities faced by underrepresented groups in the research enterprise. As we strive to recognize our own role in these challenges, we affirm our commitment to diversity and to positive change to eliminate racism in our community and in our organization.

As a step towards that change, the NIH Institutes, Centers, and Offices that are part of the NIH Blueprint for Neuroscience Research and the NIH BRAIN Initiative, strongly encourage the neuroscience community to take advantage of the new NIH-wide Faculty Institutional Recruitment for Sustainable Transformation (FIRST) Program, supported by the NIH Common Fund. Although progress has been made to increase participation of historically underrepresented groups in biomedical training stages, members of these groups are still less likely to be hired into positions as independently funded faculty researchers. These populations include underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, individuals with disabilities, individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds, and women. 

To help address this disparity, the FIRST program aims to enhance cultures of inclusive excellence through institutional support for recruitment of diverse “cohorts” of early-stage research faculty. Here, “inclusive excellence” describes the cultivation of scientific environments that can engage and benefit from a full range of talent. Neuroscience continues to be one of the fastest growing areas of biomedical research. We want the FIRST program to enable researchers to thrive, and we believe the broader neuroscience community has much to gain. Indeed, the growing field of the Science of Diversity shows the positive impacts that result when heterogeneous teams apply diverse perspectives and expertise to research challenges. We are hopeful that the cohort hiring model in FIRST will succeed in turning the culture in neuroscience departments and their institutions toward greater inclusion and diversity. We fully recognize that there are structural barriers perpetuated by gaps and that critical improvements must be made, because many groups are severely underrepresented in neuroscience. To our neuroscientists: we encourage you to take advantage of this opportunity as a path to meaningful change. We are committed to fostering a more inclusive, equitable, and diverse neuroscience community, and the FIRST program is a step in the right direction, with many, many more steps to come.

The objectives of the FIRST program are twofold: to support institutions in hiring diverse cohorts of early stage research faculty; and to transform culture at NIH-funded extramural institutions by building a community of scientists who are committed to diversity and inclusive excellence. In addition to funds for hiring, the program will support new and strengthened institution-wide approaches to facilitating the success of cohort members and future faculty from diverse backgrounds. For cohort members, this is likely to include mentoring, sponsorship, and networking opportunities. For institutions, this may include training faculty in approaches known to foster inclusive excellence and changing the rubric for interviewing processes. The FIRST program will also fund a coordination and evaluation center, which will develop and guide the collection of common data metrics to rigorously assess the effects of FIRST faculty cohorts and institutional activities on the research culture at funded institutions. Lessons learned by these institutions will be shared with the broader biomedical research community.

The FIRST program is expected to fund 12 awards over the next three years, plus the coordination and evaluation center, with an estimated budget of $241M over nine years, contingent upon the availability of funds. The first receipt date for the program’s funding opportunities is March 1, 2021. For more information, please also view the recent technical assistance webinar.

Related Resources:

*This Director’s Message was jointly authored by NINDS Director Walter J. Koroshetz, NIMH Director Joshua A. Gordon, NIA Director Richard Hodes, NIDA Director Nora D. Volkow, NCATS Director Christopher P. Austin, NICHD Director Diana W. Bianchi, NEI Director Michael F. Chiang, NIDCR Director Rena D’Souza, NIAAA Director George F. Koob, NCCIH Director Helene Langevin, NIH BRAIN Initiative Director John J. Ngai, OBSSR Director William T. Riley, NIBIB Director Bruce J. Tromberg, NIDCD Director Debara L. Tucci, NIEHS Director Rick Woychik, and NINR Director Shannon N. Zenk

Thank you for visiting My Local Pages. We hope you enjoyed seeing this news release involving the latest Mental Health news items called “The NIH Faculty Institutional Recruitment for Sustainable Transformation (FIRST) Program”. This story was posted by My Local Pages Australia as part of our World sports news services.

#NIH #Faculty #Institutional #Recruitment #Sustainable #Transformation #Program

Source link

AstraZeneca vaccine trial: NIH ‘very concerned’ about serious side effect in vaccine trial

“The highest levels of NIH are very concerned,” said Dr. Avindra Nath, intramural clinical director and a leader of viral research at the National Institute for Neurological Disorders and Stroke, an NIH division. “Everyone’s hopes are on a vaccine, and if you have a major complication the whole thing could get derailed.”

A great deal of uncertainty remains about what happened to the unnamed patient, to the frustration of those avidly following the progress of vaccine testing. AstraZeneca, which is running the global trial of the vaccine it produced with Oxford University, said the trial volunteer recovered from a severe inflammation of the spinal cord and is no longer hospitalized.

AstraZeneca has not confirmed that the patient was afflicted with transverse myelitis, but Nath and another neurologist said they understood this to be the case. Transverse myelitis produces a set of symptoms involving inflammation along the spinal cord that can cause pain, muscle weakness and paralysis. Britain’s regulatory body, the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, reviewed the case and has allowed the trial to resume in the United Kingdom.

AstraZeneca “need[s] to be more forthcoming with a potential complication of a vaccine which will eventually be given to millions of people,” said Nath. “We would like to see how we can help, but the lack of information makes it difficult to do so.”

Any decision about whether to continue the trial is complex because it’s difficult to assess the cause of a rare injury that occurs during a vaccine trial — and because scientists and authorities have to weigh the risk of uncommon side effects against a vaccine that might curb the pandemic.

“So many factors go into these decisions,” Nath said. “I’m sure everything is on the table. The last thing you want to do is hurt healthy people.”

The NIH has yet to get tissue or blood samples from the British patient, and its investigation is “in the planning stages,” Nath said. U.S. scientists could look at samples from other vaccinated patients to see whether any of the antibodies they generated in response to the coronavirus also attack brain or spinal cord tissue.

Such studies might take a month or two, he said. The FDA declined to comment on how long it would take before it decides whether to move forward.

Dr. Jesse Goodman, a Georgetown University professor and physician who was chief scientist and lead vaccine regulator at the FDA during the Obama administration, said the agency will review the data and possibly consult with British regulators before allowing resumption of the U.S. study, which had just begun when the injury was reported. Two other coronavirus vaccines are also in late-stage trials in the U.S.

If it determines the injury in the British trial was caused by the vaccine, the FDA could pause the trial. If it allows it to resume, regulators and scientists surely will be on the watch for similar symptoms in other trial participants.

A volunteer in an earlier phase of the AstraZeneca trial experienced a similar side effect, but investigators discovered she had multiple sclerosis that was unrelated to the vaccination, according to Dr. Elliot Frohman, director of the Multiple Sclerosis & Neuroimmunology Center at the University of Texas.

Past vaccine disasters show why rushing a coronavirus vaccine now would be 'colossally stupid'

Neurologists who study illnesses like transverse myelitis say they are rare — occurring at a rate of perhaps 1 in 250,000 people — and strike most often as a result of the body’s immune response to a virus. Less frequently, such episodes have also been linked to vaccines.

The precise cause of the disease is key to the decision by authorities whether to resume the trial. Sometimes an underlying medical condition is “unmasked” by a person’s immune response to the vaccine, leading to illness, as happened with the MS patient. In that case, the trial might be continued without fear, because the illness was not specific to the vaccine.

More worrisome is a phenomenon called “molecular mimicry.” In such cases, some small piece of the vaccine may be similar to tissue in the brain or spinal cord, resulting in an immune attack on that tissue in response to a vaccine component. Should that be the case, another occurrence of transverse myelitis would be likely if the trial resumed, said Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious disease specialist at the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine. A second case would shut down the trial, he said.

In 1976, a massive swine flu vaccination program was halted when doctors began diagnosing a similar disorder, Guillain-Barré syndrome, in people who received the vaccine. At the time no one knew how common GBS was, so it was difficult to tell whether the episodes were related to the vaccine.

Here's how Trump could bigfoot the FDA and get a vaccine out ahead of the science
Eventually, scientists found that the vaccine increased the risk of the disorder by an additional one case among every 100,000 vaccinated patients. Typical seasonal flu vaccination raises the risk of GBS in about one additional case in every 1 million people.

“It’s very, very hard” to determine if one rare event was caused by a vaccine, Schaffner said. “How do you attribute an increased risk for something that occurs in one in a million people?”

Before allowing U.S. trials to restart, the FDA will want to see why the company and an independent data and safety monitoring board (DSMB) in the U.K. felt it was safe to continue, Goodman said. The AstraZeneca trial in the United States has a separate safety board.

FDA officials will need to review full details of the case and may request more information about the affected study volunteer before deciding whether to allow the U.S. trial to continue, Goodman said. They may also require AstraZeneca to update the safety information it provides to study participants.

It’s possible that the volunteer’s health problem was a coincidence unrelated to the vaccine, said Dr. Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security. Studies aren’t usually stopped over a single health problem, even if it’s serious.

Yet many health leaders have expressed frustration that AstraZeneca hasn’t released more information about the health problem that led it to halt its U.K. trial.

A coronavirus vaccine by Election Day? Probably not. Here's why

“There is just so little information about this that it’s impossible to understand what the diagnosis was or why the DSMB and sponsor were reassured” that it was safe to continue, Goodman said.

AstraZeneca has said it’s unable to provide more information about the health problem, saying this would violate patient privacy, although it didn’t say how.

But there’s an exceptional need for transparency in a political climate rife with vaccine hesitancy and mistrust of the Trump administration’s handling of the COVID-19 response, leading scientists say.

“While I respect the critical need for patient confidentiality, I think it would be really helpful to know what their assessment of these issues was,” Goodman said. “What was the diagnosis? If there wasn’t a clear diagnosis, what is it that led them to feel the trial could be restarted? There is so much interest and potential concern about a COVID-19 vaccine that the more information that can be provided, the more reassuring that would be.”

The FDA will need to balance any possible risks from an experimental vaccine with the danger posed by COVID-19, which has killed nearly 200,000 Americans.

“There are also potential consequences if you stop a study,” Goodman said.

If the AstraZeneca vaccine fails, the U.S. government is supporting six other COVID vaccines in the hope at least one will succeed. The potential problems with the AstraZeneca vaccine show this to be a wise investment, Adalja said.

“This is part of the idea of not having just one vaccine candidate going forward,” he said. “It gives you a little more insurance.”

Schaffner said researchers need to remember that vaccine research is unpredictable.

“The investigators have inadvisedly been hyping their own vaccine,” Schaffner said. “The Oxford investigators were out there this summer saying, ‘We’re going to get there first.’ But this is exactly the sort of reason … Dr. [Anthony] Fauci and the rest of us have been saying, ‘You never know what will happen once you get into large-scale human trials.'”

Thank you for stopping by to visit My Local Pages and seeing this news release involving Healthy Living and related news items named “AstraZeneca vaccine trial: NIH ‘very concerned’ about serious side effect in vaccine trial”. This article was shared by MyLocalPages as part of our national news services.

#AstraZeneca #vaccine #trial #NIH #concerned #side #effect #vaccine #trial

Source link

Covid vaccine ‘Mix of science and politics’ leading to uncertainty, NIH director says

“Those who are vaccine hesitant have had their hesitancy enhanced by a variety of things that are happening right now, particularly the unfortunate mix of science and politics,” Collins said at an event hosted by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine.

“I don’t want to have us, a year from now, having a conversation about how we have in our hands the solution to the worst pandemic of more than 100 years, but we haven’t been able to actually convince people to take charge of it,” Collins said.

People need to understand that if not enough people get vaccinated, a vaccine won’t help reduce the spread of the virus, Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation’s top infectious disease official, told the Wall Street Journal on Wednesday.

“It’s a combination of how effective a vaccine is and how many people use it,” he said. “If you have a vaccine that is highly effective and not enough people get vaccinated, you’re not going to realize the full, important effect of having a vaccine.”

The less protective a vaccine is, the more people need to get it to provide population-wide immunity, Fauci said.

President Donald Trump has said a vaccine could be available before the election November 3, and on Wednesday he said a vaccine could be released by mid-October.

Fauci said he still thinks it will be the final months of the year before a vaccine is proven to be safe and effective.

”I would still put my money on November/December,” Fauci said during a Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute panel on global pandemics.

The CDC head gave a timeline. The President disputed it

The timeline for a Covid vaccine became a major headline Wednesday, when Trump challenged assertions by the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Dr. Robert Redfield said earlier that a “very limited supply” of a vaccine might be ready in November or December, but it would have to be prioritized for first responders and those at greatest risk for death.

“If you’re asking me when is it going to be generally available to the American public, so we can begin to take advantage of vaccine to get back to our regular life, I think we’re probably looking at third, late second quarter, third quarter 2021,” Redfield told a Senate appropriations subcommittee.

On top of that, “in order to have enough of us immunized so we have immunity, I think it’s going to take us six to nine months,” he said.

In the meantime, “These face masks are the most important, powerful public health tool we have,” Redfield said, holding up a blue face mask, adding that masks may offer more protection than a vaccine.

Trump said Redfield was “confused” in his testimony.

“I think he made a mistake when he said that. It’s just incorrect information,” Trump said about Redfield’s vaccine timeline.

The President also said Redfield’s comments to Congress about masks possibly being more effective than a vaccine were incorrect and that Redfield may have misunderstood the question.

“Maybe he misunderstood it,” Trump said, later adding, “As far as the masks are concerned, I hope that the vaccine is going to be a lot more beneficial than the masks.”

A CDC spokesman said in a statement that Redfield was answering a question he thought was in regard to the time period in which all Americans would have completed their Covid vaccination, and his estimate was by the second or third quarter of 2021.

“He was not referring to the time period when Covid-19 vaccine doses would be made available to all Americans,” the spokesman said.

In a later statement, Redfield said that he believes in the “importance of vaccines and the importance in particular of a Covid-19 vaccine.”

Distrust is hindering surveillance of Covid-19 spread

Distrust in government agencies is hindering surveillance of Covid-19 spread, said Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota.

“It is very challenging in many areas today, where we’re seeing people who do not want to participate in any kind of follow up with regard to surveillance, because of their distrust of government and the public health system,” he said during an American Public Health Association webinar.

Surveillance helps public health officials by collecting information on infected people, such as where they were exposed and who they’ve been in contact with, and the course of their illness.

Fauci said the variability in how the coronavirus affects people has helped fuel misunderstandings about who can spread the virus and when.

At least 40% of patients have no symptoms, while some stay ill for months on end, Fauci said.

“One of the things we’re dealing with in this country is a real lack of understanding of the importance of everybody trying to prevent getting infected rather than inadvertently… propagating the outbreak…” Fauci said during a virtual panel sponsored by the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute.

Of all the viral diseases and emerging infections that he’s encountered throughout his career, Fauci said he has “never seen anything with a range” like this virus.

“It’s just completely unique to see that degree of variability of a single microbe, which means there are things that are determining that, that we still at this point don’t understand,” he said.

7 coronavirus deaths are linked to 1 wedding

A wedding in Maine is linked to 176 Covid-19 cases and the deaths of seven people who didn’t attend the celebration — showing just how easily and quickly coronavirus can spread at social gatherings, public health experts say.

For months, doctors have stressed the importance of wearing masks, social distancing, and avoiding large gatherings.

But outbreaks have stemmed from Memorial Day events, Fourth of July celebrations and a massive motorcycle rally in Sturgis, South Dakota.

The wedding in Millinocket on August 7 had about 65 guests, a violation of the state’s 50-person limit for indoor events, the Maine Center for Disease Control and Prevention said.

The event is linked to outbreaks that have unfolded at a nursing home and a jail, both more than 100 miles away from the wedding venue, among people who had only secondary or tertiary contact with an attendee.

The first known Covid-19 death linked to the Sturgis Motorcycle Rally is in Minnesota

Residents at Maplecrest Rehabilitation and Living Center accounted for 39 cases tied to the wedding and six of the seven deaths thus far, Maine CDC Director Dr. Nirav D. Shah said.

“The virus favors gatherings,” Shah added. “It does not distinguish between happy events like a wedding celebration, or sad farewells, like a funeral.”

Despite such somber warnings, about 1,500 people descended on a New Jersey boardwalk house featured in MTV’s “Jersey Shore” on Monday night, ending in eight arrests, Seaside Heights police said.

The event was organized by a group of YouTube pranksters, according to Seaside Heights Police Detective Steve Korman, and officials say they are now worried about how they will track possible infections among more than a thousand people.

Universities try to get ahead of outbreaks

Outbreaks keep cropping up at colleges and universities, prompting some to go to virtual learning again.
Multiple Michigan State University sororities and fraternities ordered to quarantine for 2 weeks after coronavirus spike is tied to students

More than 50,000 coronavirus cases have been reported at colleges and universities in all 50 states.

Citing a significant rise in cases among students, the University of Colorado Boulder announced a 14-day quarantine period for students living within the city.

The University of Arizona is taking a similar approach, urging students to shelter in place until the end of the month after a large number of positive cases. The university reported 261 positive cases on Monday, according to the school’s coronavirus dashboard.

At the University of Missouri, two students were expelled and three were suspended for violating rules that require students who test positive to isolate and comply with social distancing.

“These students willfully put others at risk, and that is never acceptable. We will not let the actions of a few take away the opportunity for in-person learning that more than 8,000 faculty and staff have worked so hard to accomplish for the more than 30,000 MU students,” the university said in a statement Tuesday.

CNN’s Maegan Vazquez, Nick Valencia, Anna Sturla, Naomi Thomas, Maggie Fox, Elizabeth Hartfield, Jennifer Feldman, Jaqueline Howard, Andrea Diaz, Nakia McNabb, Lauren Mascarenhas and Gisela Crespo contributed to this report.

Source link

NIMH » NIH One Step Closer to Speeding Delivery of COVID-19 Testing Technologies to Those Who Need It Most Through RADx-UP

This piece was authored in collaboration with the leadership of several institutes at NIH and represents a unified effort to meet the challenges presented by the COVID-19 pandemic with excellence and innovation.

Before the nation can safely return to business as usual, it will be essential to develop and deliver effective and reliable COVID-19 testing and then implement it widely so that it is available to everyone. The NIH is rising to this challenge through the NIH’s Rapid Acceleration of Diagnostics (RADx) initiative — a national call for scientists and organizations to advance their innovative ideas for new COVID-19 testing approaches and strategies.

To speed innovation in the development, commercialization, and implementation of technologies for COVID-19 testing, NIH will use a variety of mechanisms, including extramural grants, contracts, and cooperative agreements, to move more advanced diagnostic technologies swiftly through the development pipeline toward commercialization and widespread availability — with the goal of making millions of tests available to Americans each week, especially those most vulnerable to and disproportionately affected by COVID-19.

To achieve this goal, NIH is partnering with other government organizations including the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

RADx Underserved Populations (RADx-UP)

One of the four RADx components, RADx Underserved Populations (RADx-UP) will establish a network of community-engaged projects to improve access to and acceptance of COVID-19 testing for underserved and vulnerable populations who are disproportionately affected by COVID-19. This includes populations most affected by health disparities, particularly African Americans, Hispanics or Latinos, and American Indians/Alaska Natives; those in nursing homes, jails, rural areas, or underserved urban areas; pregnant women; and the homeless.

The overarching goal of RADx-UP is to understand the factors associated with disparities in COVID-19 morbidity and mortality and, ultimately, to mitigate them through enhanced access to or acceptance of testing. RADx-UP will utilize implementation science projects to learn how to increase uptake of viral testing and engagement with care in these populations, who are disproportionately affected by, have the highest infection rates of, or are most at risk for complications or poor outcomes from the COVID-19 pandemic.

Specific activities of RADx-UP may include establishing multiple clinical research sites across the country to conduct real-time evaluations of a variety of testing methods in specific populations, areas, and settings, as well as encouraging collaboration between the program sites and the community — such as tribal health centers, places of worship, homeless shelters, and prison systems — to identify and address their unique needs.

This initiative will also develop testing strategies to apply the technological advances emerging from the various RADx efforts in real-world settings.

The RADx-UP program includes four associated funding opportunity announcements.

The first funding opportunity is a limited solicitation targeting networks and consortia with established research infrastructures and community partnerships with underserved and vulnerable communities. The goal of this funding opportunity is to better understand COVID-19 testing patterns and implement strategies or interventions with the potential to rapidly increase reach, access, acceptance, uptake, and sustainment of FDA-authorized and approved diagnostics among vulnerable populations in underserved geographic locations. Proposals are due August 7, 2020. 

The second funding opportunity has a similar focus, but shifts the pool of grants eligible for supplements to individual research awards that include community-collaborations or partnerships to support COVID-19 testing, or that have the capacity to ramp up quickly, to reach underserved or vulnerable populations. Proposals are due August 7, 2020 and September 8, 2020.

The third funding opportunity addresses the urgent need to understand the social, ethical, and behavioral implications  of COVID-19 testing among underserved and/or vulnerable populations across the United States. The overarching goal is to understand factors that have led to disproportionate burden of the pandemic on these underserved populations so that interventions can be implemented to decrease these disparities. Proposals are due August 7, 2020 and September 8, 2020.

The final funding opportunity will fund a single organization to create a Coordination and Data Collection Center (CDCC) that will serve as a national resource, working with NIH scientific staff, and consortium members to coordinate and facilitate research activities across the programs supported by the funding opportunities identified above. Proposals are due August 7, 2020.

The other elements of RADx are:

  • RADx Tech (RADx-tech) to speed the development, validation, and commercialization of innovative point-of-care and home-based tests, as well as improve clinical laboratory tests that can directly detect SARS CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. Led by the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, this fast track program leverages the Point of Care Technologies Research Network (POCTRN) to stimulate the development and commercialization of innovative technologies to significantly increase the nation’s testing capacity for SARS CoV-2.
  • RADx Radical (RADx-rad) to support new, non-traditional approaches, including the development of rapid detection devices and home-based testing technologies, that address gaps in current COVID-19 testing mechanisms. The program will also support new or non-traditional applications of existing approaches to make them more usable, accessible, or accurate. These may lead to new ways to identify the  SARS-CoV-2 virus as well as potential future viruses. Watch for new funding announcements from this program later this summer.
  • RADx Advanced Technology Platforms (RADx-ATP) to increase testing capacity and output by identifying existing and late-stage testing platforms for COVID-19 that are advanced enough to achieve rapid scale-up or expanded geographical placement in a short amount of time. These efforts will focus on scaling up technologies, including improving existing high-throughput platforms, to increase overall performance.

Want to Learn More?

If you are interested in learning more, NIH will hold two pre-application webinars. Registration is required.

  • The first webinar will be held on Friday, June 26, 2020, from 2:00pm – 4:00pm EDT. This webinar will provide an overview of the RADx-UP initiative, followed by presentations on each funding opportunity (NOT-OD-20-119, NOT-OD-20-120, NOT-OD-20-121, and RFA-OD-20-013).
  • The second webinar will be held on Wednesday, July 1, 2020, from 3:00pm – 5:00pm EDT. This webinar will focus on questions for applications for the Coordinating and Data Collection Center in response to RFA-OD-20-013. Questions related to the other three FOAs will also be addressed.

During this period of heightened awareness about the ways social injustices contribute to ongoing health disparities, it is essential that agencies use their mission-focused efforts to understand and, where possible, ameliorate health disparities.

Please let us know how you believe we can better serve science and society.

This group photo includes the following NIH Institute leaders: Diana W. Bianchi, M.D., Director, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; Patricia Flatley Brennan, R.N., Ph.D., Director, National Library of Medicine; Gary H. Gibbons, M.D., Director, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Joshua Gordon, M.D., Ph.D., Director, National Institute of Mental Health; Richard J. Hodes, M.D., Director, National Institute on Aging; Jon R. Lorsch, Ph.D., Director, National Institute of General Medical Sciences; George A. Mensah, M.D., Division Director, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Eliseo J. Pérez-Stable, M.D., Director, National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities; William Riley, Ph.D., Director, NIH Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research; Tara A. Schwetz, Ph.D., Associate Deputy Director, National Institutes of Health and Acting Director, National Institute of Nursing Research; Nora D. Volkow, M.D., Director, National Institute on Drug Abuse.

Top Row (left to right):
Diana W. Bianchi, M.D., Director, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development 
Patricia Flatley Brennan, R.N., Ph.D., Director, National Library of Medicine
Gary H. Gibbons, M.D., Director, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
Joshua Gordon, M.D., Ph.D., Director, National Institute of Mental Health

Middle Row (left to right):
Richard J. Hodes, M.D., Director, National Institute on Aging
Jon R. Lorsch, Ph.D., Director, National Institute of General Medical Sciences
George A. Mensah, M.D., Division Director, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
Eliseo J. Pérez-Stable, M.D., Director, National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities

Bottom Row (left to right):
William Riley, Ph.D., Director, NIH Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research
Tara A. Schwetz, Ph.D., Associate Deputy Director, National Institutes of Health and Acting Director, National Institute of Nursing Research
Nora D. Volkow, M.D., Director, National Institute on Drug Abuse

Source link