There are significant variations in funding for cancer research worldwide, according to a study published in The Lancet Oncology. A team from the University of Southampton emphasises the urgent need to invest more in low-income countries. The authors also found that specific treatments require greater research funding, especially surgery and radiotherapy. In addition, the overall annual research investment has decreased mainly since 2016.
For this work, the team examined two datasets recording public and philanthropic funding (from 2016 to 2020 and 2021 to 2023). They used machine learning, large language models, and expert scrutiny to assess how the funds had been allocated. In addition to a global picture, the team examined funding across the 56 Commonwealth countries.
Results from the study show that research funding is more likely to be awarded to institutions in high-income countries, leaving other countries struggling to keep pace with the demands the disease places on their own health systems. Worryingly, the rate of increase in many types of cancer is highest in these lower-income settings.
“Globally, cancer is responsible for one in five deaths. Inequalities in investment across nations and low research funding for certain treatments can lead to an imbalance in the cancers we can tackle and the areas of the world that benefit. It’s crucial we understand how and where money is allocated,” said lead author Dr Michael Head, from the University of Southampton.
Overall, the authors identified over 100,000 awards made globally during the study period, totaling 51.4bn US dollars. Of this total funding, the USA provided the highest investment at $29.3bn (57%). Combined, the Commonwealth contributed $8.7bn (17%), with the UK the lead contributor at $5.7bn (11%), followed by Australia at $1.5bn (2.9%) and Canada at $1.3bn (2.6%). In most cases, this funding was reinvested in these lead nations, with fewer grants awarded to lower-income countries.
As a whole, low-income countries received a small proportion of cancer research awards totalling just $8.4m, which represents less than 0.1% of funds awarded during the study period. The researchers highlight this as a problem, as these countries carry a heavy cancer burden, and inequalities restrict the ability of all to benefit from cancer research.
“Unless we scale up targeted investments and build local research capacity, the inequalities will continue to persist – if the US reduces its funding, that gap will widen even further. It is crucial for nation groups like the Commonwealth to coordinate efforts to mobilise funding, build sustained partnerships, and strengthen training and infrastructure so that advances in cancer science benefit everyone, everywhere,” said Anbang Du, from the University of Southampton.
In addition, the study also assessed how the funds were being used. The vast majority (76%) was for pre-clinical basic research, with breast cancer (10%), blood cancer (9%), and clinical trials (7%) well-funded. In contrast, research on cancer surgery and radiotherapy seems particularly underfunded, at 1.7% and 3.1%, respectively. Both treatments are vital to many patients, and the authors strongly urge increased funding for these areas.
Apart from an increase in 2021, global cancer research investment has decreased annually. Investment from five BRICS countries, including Russia, India, and China, increased until 2018, but has since declined. The EU, however, has followed a different trend, with investments rising since 2021.
Du, Anbang et al. Public and philanthropic research funding, publications, and research networks for cancer in the Commonwealth and globally between 2016 and 2023: a comparative analysis. The Lancet Oncology, Volume 26, Issue 9, e466 – e476