The ISSCR joined over 170 organizations representing scientists, physicians, and patient advocates in urging the U.S. Congress to reauthorize the Rare Pediatric Disease Priority Review Voucher (PRV) program. The PRV program provides a proven incentive for developing cell and gene therapies for children with rare diseases by driving private investment without additional taxpayer costs. The program has been successful in advancing research that addresses unmet clinical needs while strengthening the broader research and development ecosystem for cell and gene therapies.

The abrupt ending of NIH support for fetal tissue research will undermine the development of new therapies for diseases that affect American families. Research with human fetal tissue (HFT) and HFT-derived cell lines has been integral to biomedical progress for nearly a century and has long been supported on a bipartisan basis under many U.S. administrations. This research has contributed to fundamental advances in understanding human development, infertility, infectious diseases, and chronic and neurodegenerative conditions. HFT-derived cell lines have played a critical role in the development of vaccines that have saved millions of lives worldwide.

This research is also governed by a well-established ethical and legal framework that includes rigorous scientific review, robust informed consent, and prohibition of profit from tissue donation. While continued investment in alternative research models is important and should be encouraged, HFT remains a necessary tool for addressing certain research questions that cannot yet be adequately answered by organoids, tissue chips, and other emerging technologies.

The announcement of this immediate change to NIH policy without prior engagement with the scientific community and without advance notice for ongoing, peer-reviewed projects is highly disruptive. Engagement with researchers in advance of policy changes helps ensure that NIH’s decisions are grounded in the latest scientific evidence and that the agency is fully informed about which lines of research may be constrained or lost due to its changes in oversight. Immediate withdrawal of research support risks the loss of life-saving biomedical research and undermines responsible stewardship of public resources.

We urge reconsideration of this policy and call for NIH to engage constructively with the scientific community to support biomedical research that advances discovery and improves human health.

The ISSCR joined over 100 biomedical research organizations and institutions to urge congressional appropriators to provide at least $1.5 billion for the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health (ARPA-H). ARPA-H supports high-risk, high-reward biomedical research projects and was established in 2022 to complement the role of the National Institutes of Health. This investment would enable ARPA-H to continue supporting stem cell research and regenerative medicine projects aimed at advancing stem cell research and accelerating clinical breakthroughs.

The ISSCR joined over 450 biomedical research organizations and institutions to urge U.S. congressional appropriators to provide the NIH for Fiscal Year 2026 no less than the $47.2 billion as approved by the Senate Appropriations Committee. This investment would enable the NIH to fund promising research and support the next generation of researchers. NIH-funded research leads to medical breakthroughs, provides hope for patients and families, and advances health.

The ISSCR joined more than 50 scientific societies to send a letter to U.S. congressional leaders expressing concerns over provisions in the recent Executive Order (EO) titled “Improving Oversight of Federal Grantmaking.” The letter details how E.O. provisions threaten the long-standing merit-based peer review system that has been the gold standard for supporting cutting-edge research and driving technological innovation. Provisions the letter highlights include those on shifting the review and selection of research awards to political appointees, expansion of “termination for convenience” authority over awarded grants, vague language regarding repeat grant recipients, and the prioritization of institutions with the lowest indirect cost rates. The letter urges Congress to provide necessary oversight at scientific agencies to prevent potentially significant damage to the federal scientific grantmaking process.