Impact of Funding Cuts on Cancer Disparities Research

Many people wonder why some individuals are more prone to getting cancer and dying from it. Recent findings show significant disparities, with rural Americans being 18% more likely to die from cancer overall. Additionally, Black women face a 35% higher mortality rate from breast cancer than their white counterparts. This information comes from a report by the American Association for Cancer Research (AACR).

Researchers focus on understanding and closing these gaps. Their work has led to reductions in some disparities. However, the AACR report highlights that federal policy changes have affected around 93% of researchers in this field.

“Many medical trials were stopped in the middle — meaning those patients suddenly didn’t receive the treatments they were getting, because the funding stopped,” says Mariana Stern, professor of preventive medicine and urology at the Keck School of Medicine of USC and chair of the report committee.

The report is based on a survey of 122 researchers, with many indicating disruptions in their work. Approximately 78% of them have not been able to apply for funding, and 59% reported interruptions to ongoing projects. Notably, 59% mentioned the loss of funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

Data from JAMA Oncology reveals that in early 2025, the Trump administration canceled 181 grants from the National Cancer Institute (NCI), totaling over $317 million. These grants often focused on disparities. Thousands of NIH grants were terminated that year, according to Grant Witness, a non-profit that tracks these changes.

The funding cuts followed an executive order aimed at ending “radical” and “wasteful” diversity, equity, and inclusion research. Heather Pierce, senior director for science policy at the Association of American Medical Colleges, described these actions as unprecedented.

Despite some grants being restored after court challenges, the overall climate remains disrupted. This year, fewer grants have been awarded, causing researchers concern for patient outcomes.

“If we take our foot off the pedal of disparities research, there will be more Americans — in rural communities and others not near [centers of excellence] — who will not do well,” says Dr. Robert Winn, director of the Fox Chase Cancer Center in Pennsylvania.

Scarlett Lin Gomez from the University of California, San Francisco, notes unprecedented cuts to funding for her lab’s cancer research. She has been forced to reduce staff as a result.

These issues extend beyond funding. Changes in research focus have impacted structural efforts to address disparities in the medical community.

Mariana Stern emphasizes that representation in healthcare improves patient outcomes. The cuts hinder progress in advancing the careers of underrepresented minorities in medicine and research.

Despite progress in reducing cancer disparities over the years, significant gaps remain. For instance, rural Americans and veterans face higher cancer mortality rates. The AACR report stresses the need for continued research support.

“Cancer doesn’t care whether you’re rich or poor, whether you’re from the south side of Chicago or the east end of Richmond,” says Dr. Robert Winn. “It doesn’t care.”

The funding situation also affects the next generation of researchers and healthcare professionals. Many students, discouraged by the current environment, are reconsidering academic careers.

“We’re definitely seeing an academic brain drain,” says Gomez. “Please do not stop the research,” pleads Chickahominy Tribe citizen and cancer survivor Melanie Stewart. “Everyone deserves health care.”