Clinical research is essential to help achieve Europe's goals

Abstract

Next week the European Commission (EC) will reveal the “thematic priorities” for FP7, its next research-funding programme. This announcement is important because FP7 covers the 4-year period to 2010, which is the deadline European Union (EU) leaders have set for translating the Lisbon agenda—to make the EU the largest knowledge-based economy in the world—into practice.Enthusiasm for research in the EU is palpable. The Commission wants to double money available for Europe-wide projects to around €10 billion, and raise the proportion of gross domestic product (GDP) spent on research to 3%, in line with the USA and Japan. Industry argues that increased funding for basic research in Europe is essential to drive economic performance. But the Union's penchant for basic science has left clinical research seriously underfunded.An EC-funded survey of cancer research, due to be published on March 30, will reveal a gulf between funding for basic and clinical research. There is no established programme for funding clinical trials in the EU and, as a result, industry is monopolising large-scale clinical investigation. The EU's ambition to increase private investment to two-thirds of total research funding (2% of GDP) will extend industry's influence. But encouraging industry to dictate the direction of clinical research means that priorities may not necessarily reflect European citizens' needs. Trials of new agents will take preference over comparisons with off-patent drugs. And important health issues that fall outside therapeutic research might be neglected.Scientists decry the EC's focus on commercial research projects because it prevents “blue-skies thinking”. But the lack of provision for clinical research will prevent scientific advances being translated into health improvements. The EU has had the good sense to put health at the centre of policymaking in all areas; next week will show if this foresight has been extended to clinical research. Next week the European Commission (EC) will reveal the “thematic priorities” for FP7, its next research-funding programme. This announcement is important because FP7 covers the 4-year period to 2010, which is the deadline European Union (EU) leaders have set for translating the Lisbon agenda—to make the EU the largest knowledge-based economy in the world—into practice. Enthusiasm for research in the EU is palpable. The Commission wants to double money available for Europe-wide projects to around €10 billion, and raise the proportion of gross domestic product (GDP) spent on research to 3%, in line with the USA and Japan. Industry argues that increased funding for basic research in Europe is essential to drive economic performance. But the Union's penchant for basic science has left clinical research seriously underfunded. An EC-funded survey of cancer research, due to be published on March 30, will reveal a gulf between funding for basic and clinical research. There is no established programme for funding clinical trials in the EU and, as a result, industry is monopolising large-scale clinical investigation. The EU's ambition to increase private investment to two-thirds of total research funding (2% of GDP) will extend industry's influence. But encouraging industry to dictate the direction of clinical research means that priorities may not necessarily reflect European citizens' needs. Trials of new agents will take preference over comparisons with off-patent drugs. And important health issues that fall outside therapeutic research might be neglected. Scientists decry the EC's focus on commercial research projects because it prevents “blue-skies thinking”. But the lack of provision for clinical research will prevent scientific advances being translated into health improvements. The EU has had the good sense to put health at the centre of policymaking in all areas; next week will show if this foresight has been extended to clinical research. Independent clinical research in EuropeClinical research is the instrument for translating basic scientific discoveries into innovative therapies. The past two decades have witnessed an unprecedented increase in our knowledge of the basic mechanisms of diseases: the expansion of molecular biology and genetic studies has revealed the genetic basis of a great number of pathologies. However, there does not seem to have been a comparable interest and rigor in translating the results into clinical practice. The Academy of Medical Sciences in the UK recently underlined the widening gap between basic and clinical science, a consideration that can probably be extended to the rest of Europe. Full-Text PDF What does the EU do for its citizens' health?It has no doctors, nurses, hospitals, or beds. It controls no insurance funds, and has no responsibility for purchasing drugs. It cannot support failing health systems or ensure that successes are noted and repeated. In fact, with a 5-year budget of just o312 million for public-health activities, it would seem that the EU Directorate-General for Health and Consumer Protection has very little power to improve its citizens' health at all. Full-Text PDF