Abstract 3447: Evaluation of NIH funding for metabolomics research in epidemiologic studies: opportunities and challenges
Authors: Zanetti Krista A. , Verma Mukesh , Rogers Scott , Haznadar Majda , Maruvada Padma , Nicastro Holly L. , Playdon Mary C. , Ross Sharon A. 
Published: July 2016

Abstract
Metabolomics, an emerging area of interest in the field of epidemiology, has significant potential to evaluate the effects of nutritional, environmental, and pharmaceutical exposures; conduct risk assessments; predict disease development; and diagnose diseases. To understand current funding and potential gaps for population-based metabolomics research, we cross-sectionally evaluated the National Institutes of Health (NIH)-supported research grant awards related to metabolomics and epidemiology that were active on February 9, 2015. The grant portfolio was analyzed using NIH's Query View Report (QVR) software, using relevant search terms, which included metabolome, metabonome, metabolomic(s), metabonomic(s), metabolic profile, metabolite profile, metabolic signature, glycomic(s), and lipidomic(s). Basic descriptive statistics on technology platform, approach, disease phenotype, biospecimen type, exposure, study design, and population were examined. The search terms initially identified 473 grants. After exclusion of grants with &lt;100 cases and non-human subjects research, 102 grants remained. At the point in which the grants were coded, additional exclusions were made based on the same criteria (&lt;100 cases and non-human subject research), and on more detailed review, 68 grants remained in the final analysis. We observed that the majority of currently funded NIH grants focus on cancer (22%), followed by diabetes (21%) and cardiovascular disease (13%), and primarily examine nutritional (24%) and drug/treatment (18%) exposures. Of the 15 funded cancer metabolomics studies, the most common organ sites investigated were breast (27%) and prostate (20%), followed by lung, colorectal, esophageal, oral cancer and lymphoma. Additionally, the primary epidemiologic study designs used in the funded grants were case-control (25%), cohort (21%), and nested case-control studies (19%), and intervention trials (19%); and they mainly use plasma (54%), serum (21%) and urine (19%) biospecimens. With regard to metabolite profiling, the majority of grants use both targeted (44%) and untargeted (44%) approaches, with the primary analytical technique being liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS) (74%). The least used analytical technique for these studies was NMR (9%). This descriptive analysis provides important insights into the current NIH funding patterns for metabolomics research with an epidemiologic study design component, which allowed us to identify several challenges and research opportunities pertaining to the field.
Citation Format: Krista A. Zanetti, Mukesh Verma, Scott Rogers, Majda Haznadar, Padma Maruvada, Holly L. Nicastro, Mary C. Playdon, Sharon A. Ross. Evaluation of NIH funding for metabolomics research in epidemiologic studies: opportunities and challenges. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 107th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2016 Apr 16-20; New Orleans, LA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(14 Suppl):Abstract nr 3447.